thecampster

Way to commit buddy.

So my mention of Huerter is that he should be our 6th man in the rotation with Reddish and Hunter. His strength limitations at the 2 on defense just creates too many mismatches with Trae on the floor. Huerter threw it down a few times this past year, his hops aren't a problem but his first step, especially defensively is. People expose him almost every game with his late reaction time on ball. He plays defense scared, preferring to give and get help over going 1v1. Most of his fouls are late reactions to defensive breakdowns where he is giving help. Next to Trae, whose help recognition is good but whose effort is inconsistent and he is limited by wingspan just creates too many breakdowns. Stopping dribble penetration begins with the body and footwork, if your footwork is slow, you can't keep your man in front. 90% of your footwork is recognition and beating your man to the spot. Huerter loses this battle nightly. See this overcompensating wide stance because he knows he can't move laterally quickly enough to guard 2's consistently. See below. And as far as "White Men Can't Jump". I miss Chris Crawford. He was one beautiful bag of ugly.

This has got to be the 6th or 7th time I've said something and you produce a video confirming it. Over and over again he drives middle and is fronted immediately, because teams respect that quick stop and pop, and he passes out for a three. This is wasted on the floor next to Trae.

Huerter next to Teague, who is much better at setting up a 3 point shooter right now but not as good at penetration as Trae is my preference. Teague could really use Huerter and his ball handling ability, ability to muscle penetrate. If Huerter does one thing well, it is that dribble to the middle stop and pop or stutter and lean. Huerter is deceptively strong as a controlled driver to the basket. He can't blow by people but catch left of elbow, controlled drive to the middle of the lane is a very, very good 2nd move for him and makes you respect him spotting up from 3. So playing next to Teague for extended stretches and only spot next to Trae is how I see him.

I have thought really hard about this in the last couple of days. IMHO nobody on the Hawks is untouchable at this point except Trae, Cam. Maybe Hunter, Maybe Collins but I have to be able to see the big rosy picture in the move and not for anyone 30 and over. I don't see "a core" on this team. I see a lot of player that I need to see together for a full season around Trae and an improved/consistent Reddish. One thing that really bothered me last year was watching Huerter defend. He wasn't strong enough to hold his position and his foot speed/reaction time was slow as well. To fix foot speed you have to get leaner, to fix strength you have to sacrifice foot speed. I can't see Huerter being the defender next to Trae. IMHO he's a bench player for the Hawks going forward and that makes him trade bait in my eyes. On many teams in the league he's the perfect starting 2 but not here. We need to capitalize on other team's needs before his terrible fit becomes too obvious. Cam is the starter at the 2 in my eyes going forward.

So if you saw my post in the other thread, I'm not interested in Aldridge long term but as filler until next year is fine. The benefit with JC is he can play the 5 in limited stretches and can play the defensive 3 in a pinch. But if I'm getting Aldridge, its to flip JC for another vet star asset, draft Wiseman and Aldridge fills the gap until Wiseman is ready to start at Center full time. As I said in the previous thread, I'm not enamoured with this F/A class enough to invest 3/4 year contracts on overpays. I'm not sold on JC next to CC at this time for extended minutes. If you're going to pay a big the kind of money JC is going to command he either needs to be a strong defensive presence or have good big man handles enough to put the ball on the floor and create mismatches. JC is a very good player and does certain things A+ but if Trae is going to continue to be the point, he is going to need help on the defensive end and that means we'll need an elite shot blocker. I would prefer trades for short term contracts if we can't land the right big fish in free agency

Okay so I'm looking at lists. I'm looking for players with 1 to 2 years of salary left (2020-21, 2021-22 seasons). Let me toss out trade targets for you. Steven Adams 1 year left, $27.5 million Lamarcus Aldridge - 1 year left, $24 million. Now the assumption here is you can resign either or both. Assets - Dedmon, Huerter, Collins, Fernando....a bunch of 2nds and our first in each of the upcoming drafts. Trading only 1 player creates enough room to acquire both. Let's pretend Dedmon + 2 2nds nets you Adams and Huerter + Fernando nets you Aldridge. Both teams do these trades to free up cap room/avoid the LT. San Antonio in particular has some decisions to make which Aldridge will inhibit. Both trades are reasonable...please no arguments here. So instead of hoping for free agents this year, you create flexibility for next year and then can get creative with Collins or deal with lingering injury possibilities with Capela/Skal. Young/2nd round pick Reddish/1st round pick Hunter Aldridge/Collins/Skal Adams/Capela I am not advocating this, I'm just saying to me 1 year of this and all our space back is preferable to overpaying for any borderline F/A. If you could make both trades, you'd still have 16 million to fill out the bench, resign Teague (6 ish million)..etc I'm not tied to those 2 players, the salary length just jumped out at me. Trades for players like Lowry and Gobert are possible with enough assets thrown at them. But 1-2 year contract players to give a team cap relief and fit them into our space. Kelly Oubre is an interesting name that could be available. I'd just rather bring in next year's free agent class than get shut out by the top names in this one. Hear me out on this. It doesn't matter who comes to our roster, the days of the lottery are over. we're a bottom tier playoff team no matter what we do based on natural improvement from our young players. So positioning on salary the next 3 years is now the key to being a long term player as a top team.

So I don't think AD is coming here and and if the free agent isn't AD, I think I'd rather spend our cash on trades for other people's stars again who are a better fit. Give the youngins one more year to grow and then make our moves next year. IMHO we already have our future at the 1, 2 and 3. Whether long term its Collins or Capela at the 4 remains to be seen, but that 5 position has been our problem since Mutombo left. I want Wiseman in the draft. But unless we can sign AD, play him at the 4 and Capela at the 5, I don't see a needle mover in this free agent class.

Like I said before, I'm not in favor of reopening the country so someone can keep their 2nd yacht. So going back to the numbers I was spouting 10 days ago (ish). https://www.yahoo.com/news/flu-deaths-were-counted-covid-053449918.html "If flu deaths were counted like COVID-19 deaths, the worst recent flu season evidently killed 15,620 Americans". For those who consistently say this is like the flu, READ THE ARTICLE. Not the headline, not one or two lines that sound like what you're thinking. READ THE WHOLE FRICKEN THING".

Things get stupid, you think people are taking things seriously......and then there's this https://www.yahoo.com/news/kentucky-woman-coronavirus-arrested-violating-185225816.html

http://www.tankathon.com/ If you want to know where we stand right now pre-lottery. Team top 4 top 1 1. Golden State 52.1% 14.0% 2. Cleveland 52.1% 14.0% 3. Minnesota 52.1% 14.0% 4. Atlanta 48.1% 12.5% 5. Detroit 42.1% 10.5% 6. New York 37.2% 9.0% 7. Chicago 32.0% 7.5% 8. Charlotte 26.3% 6.0% 9. Washington 20.3% 4.5% 10. Phoenix 13.9% 3.0% 11. San Antonio 9.4% 2.0% 12. Sacramento 6.2% 1.3% 13. New Orleans 5.7% 1.2% 14. Portland 2.4% 0.5% One side note: We don't have 2 picks this year. I forgot we gave up the Brooklyn pick to Minnesota.

https://www.the-sun.com/news/753568/germany-bring-back-coronavirus-lockdowns-cases-surge/ Germany reopened, surge in cases, they might be locking it back down.

Okay so this is tricky. The real reason for that charge in in figuring for teams up against the cap. First things first, NBA rosters consist of 15 players Maximum but 13 players minimum. The cap charges begin when you fall below 13 players. So 12 players on roster = 1 cap charge. Currently the Hawks have 8 players on the roster and 2 first round picks incoming (Hawks + Nets). That's 10. So we would see 3 cap charges (assuming no free agents are resigned). So pretend the Hawks sign 2 free agents in the off-season with 10 on roster. That's 12. Signing 1 keeps you under the cap because of our space. Signing 2 however must account for 1 additional player required to get the team to 13. 2 slots - 1 goes to the free agent, 1 to slot protection. Only that 1 slot counts against the cap. So scenario...Say cap 117 million (we don't know it yet). Hawks have 11 players on Roster @ 100 million....17 million to sign right?....Wrong! 100 million + 1 roster spots at $946,543 = $80,000,000 + $946,543 = $80,946,543 - 117 million = $16,053,457 available for the new salary. But even that isn't the whole story. The cap space is configured based on the free agents on your roster from the previous year. Free agents from the previous season on your own roster hold the following cap holds heading into the next season unless signed by another team or you renounce your rights to the free agent. Bird free agent: If not coming off a rookie scale contract, and salary was at or above the estimated average salary, 150% of previous salary. If not coming off a rookie scale contract, and salary was below the estimated average salary, 190% of previous salary. If coming off the fourth season of a rookie scale contract, and salary was at or above the estimated average salary, 250% of previous salary. If coming off the fourth season of a rookie scale contract, and salary was below the estimated average salary, 300% of previous salary. If coming off the third season of a rookie scale contract, the maximum amount that the team can pay under the Bird exception. Early Bird: If coming off the second season of a rookie scale contract, the maximum amount that the team can pay under the Bird exception. Otherwise, 130% of previous salary. Non-Bird: 120% of previous salary. So see Jeff Teague - last year's salary was 19 million. His rule = 150% of salary (I need to check this. not sure how Sham got that). So his cap is $28,500,000. No problem you say, we can renounce Teague and get his $28,500,000 back. Again NO! Because renouncing Teague is how you got to 12 slots in the first place. Every player you don't renounce is a roster slot occupied but not at 946k per year but at their old salary + a modifier of 20 to 200% more. Short answer. Assuming nothing changes. We will start free agency with 3 cap holds if we renounce all free agents. Each free agent kept lessens the holds but decreases our total cap number. All that said. Our current cap number if we renounce everyone and sign both draft picks at slots 8 and 17 is $ 66,518,866 with $ 50,481,134 in cap space. That includes all holds. This assumes a cap number of $117 million which is going to change because of Corona. Minor correction. With each signing the hold changes slightly. Its not all or nothing. I know you know this but I'm stating it to clarify for all.

I agree but it is hard with this. My post is borderline inappropriate. So much of this is going to boil over into the political edges soon and its going to be a blurred line. I think I'm most bothered right now but all the posturing and jockeying for position right now. Its very disrespectful to the people who have paid with their lives so far. Everything from people trying to tie Climate Change to this to others hitting on illegal immigration. This isn't the time to further your personal agendas. We can sort that out later. All that said...how the heck are you AHF...keeping sane?

Maybe the scarier part is the research partner they employed for the study "Lucid". One of the primary services "Lucid" offers is to help you monetize your research with targeted marketing, improving response. IE. telling those reading the results what to believe and how to target them. https://luc.id/monetization/

This is a really, really good lesson for all of those not familiar with the media, paid polling or public affairs. https://theweek.com/speedreads/910699/alarming-number-americans-believe-coronavirus-vaccine-exists-being-withheld So forget the nonsense answer in the poll of 48% of Americans believe there is a vaccine and the government is hiding it or that more than 50% of Democrats agree. Those are sensationalist and depends how the question was asked. Get to the bottom line here. Who paid for it and why do they care if people don't trust what the government says. This poll right here explains everything wrong with politics. Someone is paying for these types of things and putting them out there in an attempt to make people believe its okay to get caught up in a new conspiracy. This is to throw off the election, get people riled up, etc. This is pre-fake news. Read it, but ask yourself, who thought it was a good idea to ask those questions and why? So taking the hidden link to the original story we find this quote, "according to the Democracy Fund + UCLA Nationscape Project with USA TODAY" Hmm...so a quick search finds Nationscape's site and the democracy funds site and a quick trip to the bottom shows their about pages. Go a little farther and then bam...you find who is behind it. Pierre Omidyar from Wikipedia "Omidyar and his wife, Pamela, own properties in Henderson, Nevada,[39] and Honolulu, Hawaii.[1] According to Forbes, his net worth was $13.1 billion (US) as of January 2019.[11] Omidyar is a major donor to Democratic Party candidates and organizations." Okay so I'm not saying oh crazy guy or any of this nonsense. Just giving a politics lesson here in general. We are in the middle of a global pandemic, both sides struggling to get together, find common ground. Then this weird survey gets out with generic names behind it. But we all know there are no real generic names. Here we have a guy asking questions meant to get at how to push peoples' buttons. See what conspiracies people believe or don't and how deep that belief goes. You wonder how it becomes news. Because people like this push it from behind. Both sides, doing what they do. This is why you can't trust what you read. All of the information is being surveyed early on. Stances formulated well in advanced and then pushed at you with studies funded by people with agendas. Be careful.

One big fat audible sigh https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/coronavirus-covid-19-ftse-100-dax-cac-40-stocks-markets-24-april-remdesivir-gilead-075309066.html

Speaking of not telling someone "their" wrong. If you can say "thet are" it's spelled they're.

So we got a letter from the executives today. States that they know that in the state there have conflicting reports of the state reopening. States we will rely on the advice of the CDC and medical professionals. That we are currently in a work from home if you are able posture and you will be given significant lead time once we begin working toward returning to the workplace. .... Translation...."this don't change nothin"

FYI, When the "discussion" began in earnest on death rates last week I tossed out a number. By Thursday night/Friday morning we were at 33,000 dead. As of this morning 5 to 6 days later, 45000. 12k dead in 6 days. I'm thinking this rush to reopen really should be delayed a week or two.

I'm not even worried about the double hop. The foot drag to set it up and the push off to get to the jump are both not okay. Read the article. It explains why both studies can't be trusted.

and since you brought it up.....https://ftw.usatoday.com/2018/12/luka-doncic-step-back-move-video-travel-legal-refs-james-harden-rookie-mavs-nba

@Bleachkit So you really, really might want to read this article buddy. It states almost verbatim many of the objections I brought up, and throws in a few of their own explaining why the study shouldn't be trusted. Specifically they discuss the problem with soliciting via Facebook ads and how that would draw a much larger participant group who may have concealed they believed they already had symptoms. https://www.yahoo.com/news/new-studies-suggest-huge-undercount-of-coronavirus-infections-but-are-they-right-161418566.html

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11441636/john-mcdaniel-killed-coronavirus-dismissing-political-ploy/ AHEM!!! Famous last posts and all.

Reading with a grain of salt...but still good info. https://www.jpost.com/HEALTH-SCIENCE/Coronavirus-has-mutated-into-at-least-30-different-strains-new-study-finds-625333