Trade Horford

[Diesel]

I would consider trading Horford for younger proven talent but not to give him away for nothing.

Horford for Drummond and Charlie V.

[Sothron]

I have been very consistent with this statement: I would tank and lose and be in the hunt for a superstar in the draft than be stuck in the NBA hell of being a playoff treadmill team. The Hawks teams that made the playoffs the last few years were all treadmill teams. They had ZERO CHANCE of getting past the second round of the playoffs but were too good to tank and actually get a superstar.

If we could trade Horford for the right deal I would do it.

[NBASupes]

Horford for Drummond and Charlie V.

The problem is Det isn't trading him for Drummond, they would for Monroe but that wouldn't help us much. We need a quick tank. Two year tanking plan. In order to do that you need to gut the roster but keep one very good player where the players can tank around. Place NBDL level players around him and one prospect. Example, Kwame, Gerald Green, Anthony Randolph, Mack, Benson, you know, scrubs.Keep a player like Lou so we can have some chance of not looking is we are purposely tanking and sucking.

Remember Miami one year tank with Wade.

They would have been more successful tanking the next year if they stayed with scrubs around Wade. Wade was a top 3-5 NBA player at that time. Al is more of a 15-25 level player. We can tank much easier with him then Wade.

It should be simple. Suck bad first year. Get Wiggins, Parker or Smart.

Play them in a rotation to develop.

Suck again.

Get Okafor, Jones, or Towns.

Get in the playoffs in year three.

Become a contender in year four.

OKC did a three year tank. Got Durant, Westbrook, and Harden. Then got an asset in Jeff Green. Some great management and tanking.

Bad tanks are Minny, Charlotte, and Toronto.

[KB21]

I have been very consistent with this statement: I would tank and lose and be in the hunt for a superstar in the draft than be stuck in the NBA hell of being a playoff treadmill team. The Hawks teams that made the playoffs the last few years were all treadmill teams. They had ZERO CHANCE of getting past the second round of the playoffs but were too good to tank and actually get a superstar.

If we could trade Horford for the right deal I would do it.

That statement completely ignores the reams of data that is available that shows tanking is the worst strategy you can take. Teams very rarely go from very bad to very good. There is a reason teams like Cleveland, Sacramento, Charlotte, and Washington are in the lottery and competing for the top pick every year.

So, basically if you tank and win fewer than 20 games to improve your draft status, you have a much better chance of reaching the 40-44 win plateau in 6 years than you do of reaching the 50+ wins. Teams that tank reach 40-44 wins 33% of the time in 6 years and have an 8% chance of reaching 50+ wins over a 10 year period. Wow!!! What a great freaking strategy!! I'm going to blow my team up for an 8% chance at doing something.

Conversely, Let's say we make moves to maintain the competitiveness of the 45-49 win team that we currently are. We would more than double our chances of becoming a championship caliber team over taking.

Any decision making process that relies on the luck of the lottery balls falling your way is a poor strategy.

The obvious best strategy to take based on the numbers is to make moves that maintain the competitiveness of the team, even if that means resigning Josh Smith after the market has been set for him, bringing in Al Jefferson, and going with a front court of Al Jefferson at center, Al Horford at power forward, and Josh Smith at small forward. While that doesn't necessarily make us championship contenders, it does give the team assets going forward. We now have a scouting staff and front office that I believe will use their draft picks wisely, and when you have assets, particularly young assets like John Jenkins, you can make deals going forward that can net you players like Kawhi Leonard in the draft (SA traded George Hill to get that draft pick).

This is the last time I'm going to address the stupid idea of tanking. It's such a poor strategy and stupid idea that it doesn't deserve anymore of my time discussing it. Particularly when people want to continue ignoring the data, and with the data being collected from 1978-2011, it isn't exacly a small sample size. Heck, I was born in 1978.

[tonegully]

I hate when people say that. They been saying for years with Smith. At least with Smith, you know you can place him in a role which would be better for him to produce like we did in 09-10 than he did recently as a #1 offensive option. Teague is what he is. His BBIQ is average at best. He isn't an elite scoring PG nor is he close. He can't create for others. He is your typical good talent undersized SG who is playing PG due to a lack of position.

No coaching staff is changing that. None. Nada. Nil. He is what he is. Wasting our time on him is just bad management if our plan is for him to be the starter. Look at Grevis Vasquez. He too is outproduced like Jeffery. While his stats look nicer than Jeff's, his team is better when he's off the court and he gets outproduced. What does that say. He is not a starter even if his stats look nice. Why is that? He can't create for others. He is not an elite scoring PG. He has average BBIQ. He just doesn't have the ability to be a starting PG but he does have talent as many on the Pelicans forum will tell you but if you ask what their biggest need is, it's PG. Since the Smoove era, we have clamored over these athletic talented players who aren't starting level players. We love Jamal. We love Smoove who have great talent, we love Teague. None of these guys are championship players as starters and will never be championship players as starters. Even Smoove is best coming off the bench like a Manu Gilinobi.I

I have to disagree with you here.

IMO I think Jeff is scoring guard. Jeff at times has shown he can get anywhere he wants to on the floor and score. He went head to head with one of the best guards in the east in derrick rose and did more than just hold his own.

I blame the coaching staff for trying to turn Jeff into something that he isnt. He isnt your traditional point guard, where he looks for others. He is a scoring guard and should be used as such. All that quickness plus has the floater which is almost automatic and Drew wants him to pass the freaking ball when he can beat his man 99% of the time. Then Woody just wouldnt play him.

I would love to see him and Horf be the Parker and Duncan of this team and not have to pass the ball to Josh all the freaking time. If I was the coach i would just tell him "go do your thing, do what you are good at" at least one half and see whats up. I think Teague could be a great talent, Top 5 PG in the league, no but certainly top 10 is within reach.

As the young kids say today. Let Teague cook.

[Sothron]

The problem with your data is simple: it means nothing. Absolutely nothing. No one cares about regular season wins in the NBA. All that matters is winning championships. There have only been two teams in the HISTORY of the NBA that won a title without having a superstar player. So I counter your regular season win chart with something even simpler: you need superstars to win titles. There are three ways to get superstars:

Free agency

Trade

Draft

I am a proponent of any method that nets us a superstar. The WORST thing you can be is not a lottery team. Oh no. The WORST thing is to be a treadmill playoff team that will never make it past the second round but will never fail to make the playoffs and get lucky in the lottery. What you are suggesting is that we reload with more non superstar talent to maintain a failed status quo.

No thanks to that fella.

[NBASupes]

I have to disagree with you here.

IMO I think Jeff is scoring guard. Jeff at times has shown he can get anywhere he wants to on the floor and score. He went head to head with one of the best guards in the east in derrick rose and did more than just hold his own.

I blame the coaching staff for trying to turn Jeff into something that he isnt. He isnt your traditional point guard, where he looks for others. He is a scoring guard and should be used as such. All that quickness plus has the floater which is almost automatic and Drew wants him to pass the freaking ball when he can beat his man 99% of the time. Then Woody just wouldnt play him.

I would love to see him and Horf be the Parker and Duncan of this team and not have to pass the ball to Josh all the freaking time. If I was the coach i would just tell him "go do your thing, do what you are good at" at least one half and see whats up. I think Teague could be a great talent, Top 5 PG in the league, no but certainly top 10 is within reach.

As the young kids say today. Let Teague cook.

If we use this logic with all of our players, Josh should get the max. We should have never traded Joe because he was a superstar like v. Boston, and Bibby should still be here do to his play at times in the regular season. We can't cherry pick and say well, he was very good v. this team when that team didn't focus on him and were focused on Jamal and Joe and then say well, I like him, so let's keep him.

The bottom line is he isn't an elite scoring guard.

He rarely creates for others.

He doesn't have elite BBIQ.

How can you use him as a starting PG on any NBA team today? You would be at a disadvantage but he has flashes where he is too good and helps you win some games. If we are tanking it is better to go with Mack. We know he below average at this level. If you want to contend, you go with CP3, you know he can dominate at this level. Just makes more sense.

[Guest]

The problem is Det isn't trading him for Drummond, they would for Monroe but that wouldn't help us much. We need a quick tank. Two year tanking plan. In order to do that you need to gut the roster but keep one very good player where the players can tank around. Place NBDL level players around him and one prospect. Example, Kwame, Gerald Green, Anthony Randolph, Mack, Benson, you know, scrubs.Keep a player like Lou so we can have some chance of not looking is we are purposely tanking and sucking. Remember Miami one year tank with Wade.They would have been more successful tanking the next year if they stayed with scrubs around Wade. Wade was a top 3-5 NBA player at that time. Al is more of a 15-25 level player. We can tank much easier with him then Wade. It should be simple. Suck bad first year. Get Wiggins, Parker or Smart.Play them in a rotation to develop.Suck again.Get Okafor, Jones, or Towns.Get in the playoffs in year three.Become a contender in year four. OKC did a three year tank. Got Durant, Westbrook, and Harden. Then got an asset in Jeff Green. Some great management and tanking. Bad tanks are Minny, Charlotte, and Toronto.

And if we don't get ANY of those players? Just throw it out there like we are GUARANTEED to get any of them.

[NBASupes]

The problem with your data is simple: it means nothing. Absolutely nothing. No one cares about regular season wins in the NBA. All that matters is winning championships. There have only been two teams in the HISTORY of the NBA that won a title without having a superstar player. So I counter your regular season win chart with something even simpler: you need superstars to win titles. There are three ways to get superstars:

Free agency

Trade

Draft

I am a proponent of any method that nets us a superstar. The WORST thing you can be is not a lottery team. Oh no. The WORST thing is to be a treadmill playoff team that will never make it past the second round but will never fail to make the playoffs and get lucky in the lottery. What you are suggesting is that we reload with more non superstar talent to maintain a failed status quo.

No thanks to that fella.

You have to remember, not everyone wants to tank. Some just hate it. They want to watch Basketball where they can win the game. They don't really care for the draft. That's not their thing.

I see it like you do. You need superstars. These next two drafts have potential. Every NBA team today has legit talent. If we put out Mack, Green, and Brown as starters, we would be the only team putting out more than one scrub in a starting lineup in the NBA. Charlotte nor Orlando is doing that. We would most definitely be tanking with Horford being the only good player and Jenkins at least being somewhat respectable.

[wolvetigers]

To think that Tanking would actually work for a Franchise that desperately needs to build a winning image..UNREAL that people would want to Tank...especially given the light that when we were in the lottery we never won the 1st pick anyway....WAKE UP HAWKS FANS - LETS ACT LIKE WINNERS....I've never heard of Championship organizations talk of tanking.

Edited June 24, 2013 by wolvetigers

[NBASupes]

And if we don't get ANY of those players? Just throw it out there like we are GUARANTEED to get any of them.

We got to get a top 6 pick. We would really suck with Green/Brown/Mack or comparable scrubs out there. The odd of falling out of the top 6 would be extremely low. We would be as bad as Orlando would be next year if not worse.

To think that Tanking would actually work for a Franchise that desperately needs to build a winning image..UNREAL that people would want to Tank...especially given the light that when we were in the lottery we never won the 1st pick anyway....WAKE UP HAWKS FANS - LETS ACT LIKE WINNERS....I've never heard of Championship organizations talk of tanking.

If we miss on CP3/D12, what are our options. We can't win with anyone else in FA. Why waste the money and the time?

[Sothron]

You have to remember, not everyone wants to tank. Some just hate it. They want to watch Basketball where they can win the game. They don't really care for the draft. That's not their thing.

I see it like you do. You need superstars. These next two drafts have potential. Every NBA team today has legit talent. If we put out Mack, Green, and Brown as starters, we would be the only team putting out more than one scrub in a starting lineup in the NBA. Charlotte nor Orlando is doing that. We would most definitely be tanking with Horford being the only good player and Jenkins at least being somewhat respectable.

Tanking like that is definitely my plan B if Ferry is unable to lure Dwight or Paul here. And its looking like plan B is the only realistic option at this point.

[Sothron]

To think that Tanking would actually work for a Franchise that desperately needs to build a winning image..UNREAL that people would want to Tank...especially given the light that when we were in the lottery we never won the 1st pick anyway....WAKE UP HAWKS FANS - LETS ACT LIKE WINNERS....I've never heard of Championship organizations talk of tanking.

Do you want to win a ring or just be in the playoffs? Because the NBA isn't a sport where making the playoffs means you actually have a chance like in the NFL or NHL or MLB. You need superstars in the NBA to win a ring. No superstar, no chance. I'm tired of having no chance because our front office won't do whatever it takes to get a superstar.

[NBASupes]

Tanking like that is definitely my plan B if Ferry is unable to lure Dwight or Paul here. And its looking like plan B is the only realistic option at this point.

A quick tank is perfect. Two really bad years. No three year tank plan. Wiggins, for as talented as he is, he is still somewhat raw. He is not Lebron, he won't come into the NBA dropping 20ppg. But his 2nd year, I can see him getting 23-25ppg. With Horford right there as well as another top tier draft pick, he can develop quickly like D. Rose and Durant.

[Jody23]

I think the Hawks have to be careful with this whole tanking thing. Not only is it a gamble, but the league frowns upon it. Just ask the Bucks, Celtics and Grizzlies who all thought they had a shot at Oden and Durant how openly tanking worked out for them. It's not the only option.

[NBASupes]

I think the Hawks have to be careful with this whole tanking thing. Not only is it a gamble, but the league frowns upon it. Just ask the Bucks, Celtics and Grizzlies who all thought they had a shot at Oden and Durant how openly tanking worked out for them. It's not the only option.

Grizz had some terrible drafting. Thabeet over Harden. and numerous others. They had bad management.

Celtics did a great job. Trade their assets for KG. Traded their pick for Allen. Won a ring the next year. Great tank.

Bucks just are a poorly ran org and still is.

[KB21]

I think the Hawks have to be careful with this whole tanking thing. Not only is it a gamble, but the league frowns upon it. Just ask the Bucks, Celtics and Grizzlies who all thought they had a shot at Oden and Durant how openly tanking worked out for them. It's not the only option.

My very last comment. Tanking is not an option at all. How many teams have tanked and gone on to win a championship? The San Antonio Spurs were a 50+ win team that fell to 20 wins due to injuries, not because they decided to play scrubs and intentionally lose. Cleveland tanked to get LeBron, and it took them 5 years to even play for a championship.

Those of you that support tanking, I don't ever want to hear you talk bad about Josh Smith shooting jumpers from 22 feet. Low percentage is low percentage, and if you support an 8% chance over a 10 year period of reaching the level you need to be at to be a championship team, then you should also support a player shooting shots that he hits 27% of the time.

[Admin]

My very last comment. Tanking is not an option at all. How many teams have tanked and gone on to win a championship? The San Antonio Spurs were a 50+ win team that fell to 20 wins due to injuries, not because they decided to play scrubs and intentionally lose. Cleveland tanked to get LeBron, and it took them 5 years to even play for a championship. Those of you that support tanking, I don't ever want to hear you talk bad about Josh Smith shooting jumpers from 22 feet. Low percentage is low percentage, and if you support an 8% chance over a 10 year period of reaching the level you need to be at to be a championship team, then you should also support a player shooting shots that he hits 27% of the time.

You're not going to get through to these people who continue to ignore the overwhelming evidence against tanking. Thankfully we have a GM and brand new 1st time head coach who aren't going to tarnish their careers by tanking.

[Jody23]

Grizz had some terrible drafting. Thabeet over Harden. and numerous others. They had bad management.Celtics did a great job. Trade their assets for KG. Traded their pick for Allen. Won a ring the next year. Great tank.Bucks just are a poorly ran org and still is.

The point I'm making is that tanking is extremely risky and does not guarantee you a star player.

[NBASupes]

My very last comment. Tanking is not an option at all. How many teams have tanked and gone on to win a championship? The San Antonio Spurs were a 50+ win team that fell to 20 wins due to injuries, not because they decided to play scrubs and intentionally lose. Cleveland tanked to get LeBron, and it took them 5 years to even play for a championship.

Those of you that support tanking, I don't ever want to hear you talk bad about Josh Smith shooting jumpers from 22 feet. Low percentage is low percentage, and if you support an 8% chance over a 10 year period of reaching the level you need to be at to be a championship team, then you should also support a player shooting shots that he hits 27% of the time.

The reason why no one is listening to you is simple.In the NBA you need prime talent. If you can't get it via FA, you have to get it in the draft.

Your idea of getting Leonard types and developing them would mean you would have to have a contending squad which makes it easy to plug and play guys and develop them. The problem is, we don't have that guy on this roster which gives us the ability to develop them since we would have to put them in a role that's too big for their britches. So in other words, we need to get back into the draft during a time when the draft is strong. This upcoming draft at the top is very strong. About five-seven potential franchise players. We can land one and feel good for along time. The worse we can do is get an Al Horford potential player which is still an amazing pick if it's a true center or a PG. That's why tanking is good. You don't want to tank in weak drafts. We did that with Childress and Shelden. We needed to tank the year we got Al which was good and the year Kevin Love and guys that were in the draft. Great tanking years.