Zach Lowe: Everyone wants the same lopsided deal Atlanta got for Joe Johnson

[Wretch]

All I wanted the GM to do ( I refuse to even say his name anymore ) . . . was to build the best team possible . . or tear it completely down. Don't play it down the middle. But that's exactly what he did.

But people praise that dude like he has done something great.

Could not agree more. Give the man his due for getting out from under that contract, but if you can find someone to absorb the JJ deal - you have LUCKED UP. This is a no-brainer move (like selecting Josh Smith at 17 if he falls into your lap). However, you don't follow up that deal by continuing to climb to the top of mediocrity. If you move your top talent, you don't build around 3rd and 4th tier guys to "compete" for a token playoff appearance. You certainly don't need a whole year to evaluate building around JOSH SMITH.IMO all Ferry has done up to this point is business as usual and attempt a new twist on building a team. But there is no innovative or creative way to rebuild. You just do it and get it over with.

And what position did you have on CP3? I think he and Nash are two of the most overrated players of their time.Nash is the worst defender of his era easily. If here were a stat for dribble drives allowed, he'd have twice as many as the #2 guy for players with 10+ years of service. All theough the 2000's he was a whipping boy for any and every athletic PG in the league. And not the Roses and Westbrooks of the world,C-list guys like Darren Collison or Jarret Jack have had monster games and wins versus Nash's Suns, who have coincidentally done okay since his departure while the Lakers are free falling.Paul's outside shot and his confidence in it is shaky and trapping his PNR with length pretty much renders him useless. They looked considerably better as a team with Reddick in and him out. All he wants to do is look fiery and active on D (where his lack of length and short legs really hurt him) and rack up flashy assists. That's when he isn't flopping or getting injured. He loses to Jeff Teague every year for God's sakes. Corey Joseph bottled him up on D and Patty Mills dazzled him on high screens. How is that possible/ acceptable?Players throughout history who dominate the ball with assist titles and MVPs go deep in the playoffs annually, that's all there is to it. I would hope all of their fans enjoy their crow when two of the national media's arguably "Best PGs in the League" for years both fail to lead their teams to a single Finals appearance. I'm not looking forward to the Chris Paul farewell tour of him trying to latch on to a contender and failing miserably with covering ground and staying healthy while making a King's Ransom from some dumb GM. I know all the excuses you could come up with for them coming up so short so much: coaching, teammates, the Spurs, injuries from them not being well-conditioned. All weak.The PG position is still as important as ever, the way you approach it relative to your team makes the difference. Fisher, Parker, Billups, and Kidd all won rings without the overall skill level of Nash or Paul because their franchises know the value of moving the ball quickly and putting the distribution onis on the whole team for 48 minutes, not a grossly undersized PG for 36.

LOL...Ben, you are the same dude that says Michael Jordan was overrated. :D So, a merry-go-round with you on this is not very attractive for me. I think there is a fair comparison to be made between the talents you listed, and my preference for a PG is more of a defensive minded/gambling (Payton/Mookie/Cheeks) facilitator/distributor (Mark Jackson/Kidd)...over any hint of a combo/scorer no matter HOW proficient they may be at it.

That being said, the conversation about Paul back then for me was quite simple. We needed a PG. People were scared away by his size, I demonstrated that he out-rebounded and took more trips to the line than entire FRONT COURTS at the collegiate level. I showed that he held his own defensively against bigger backcourts and did not struggle to score. And at 6' in shoes, he was not "short." Ultimately, I had a slight preference to Paul over Deron, but I would have been ECSTATIC if we had drafted either.

I don't really like direct comparisons across eras, because I believe you can't really account for the chemistry and environment of certain teams. How would CP3 have fared under no-nonsense Popovich? With the ultimate class act/disciplined presence like Duncan? More importantly, I would have rather seen Paul/Smoove/Joe over Marvin/Smoove/Joe and I'm confident (don't read this @AHF lol) that we had a shot at tanking/trading for D12 (who was very raw, right out of HS, and had suspect game - still does), snapping up Smoove as he fell to 17, drafting CP3, and signing JJ. LOL...oh but that's another Merry-Go-Round.

In short, I'm not a Paul fan per-se. But he or Deron WAS the right pick for us at the time. I wanted to trade down for him and get Charlotte's 2nd lottery pick (for Sean May or another asset) and I think they were offering it for the opportunity to bring Marvin Williams home.

I remember this one guy, named Joe Johnson I think. He left a contender to come to a 13 win Hawks team for.......what exactly?

Indiana picked up Turner for a reason just in case Stephenson prices himself out of their range or someone pulls a Daryl Morey and Gilbert Arenas provisions them similar to what happened with Asik and Lin.

Dallas is a bit iffy considering that they are already paying Monta to play SG for them.

Charlotte has attracted but one dreg off the free agency market... I see no reason why they would succeed at what the Hawks haven't in the past decade.

Phoenix will be working on resigning this other combo guard that they traded for by the name of Eric Bledsoe to continue playing next to their other combo by the name of Goran Dragic.

LA is intriguing but they won't be able to afford Kobe and Melo and why would that intrigue a SG knowing that he will be behind the depth chart of two egomaniacs?

So let's see, money, opportunity to be the face of the franchise, market and location and for a team that prior to this year was periodically in the playoffs. I mean it's just sooooooo easy to place a team like Charlotte ahead of the Hawks given their second ever playoff appearance pedigree. Wait, I forget all that will change once they take over the Hornets history.

I just wanted to pop in here... Joe Johnson was a young/unproven 4th string for a contender. We gambled on a max deal for him, but that's not always going to turn out as well as it did for us. Sometimes, those deals become a crippling albatross. Those deals will always be out there, but for people on the Squawk who covet Danny's "smart" way of managing cap space and their reluctance to overspend or take a chance on guys like Turner/Jefferson/Tyreke...I don't see how people can get behind a deal like the one that brought JJ out of Phoenix.

Maybe not you specifically, but using the same context in which we got Joe...with this management team/direction? I figure most posters here won't go for a deal/gamble like that. More importantly, I don't see Danny Ferry going for a deal like that. IRONICALLY......

Ferry had the chance to make a ballsy play for JJ to bring him to Cleveland with LeBron. He balked because Phoenix threw that bullshit out there that they would match any offer for JJ (even a max) and he settled on Larry Hughes (which, being a LeBron fan at the time...and a former A.I./Philly follower...I thought was beyond stupid). JJ wanted out of Phoenix because they were being cheap with him and d#cking him around (he even said he felt disrespected). They were not going to match a max contract for their 4th option, they just worked up the price on him KNOWING he was leaving - BK got suckered (no surprise given JJ was the missing link at PG for his ridiculous all 6'8" team - which is where we were going to us him [link - click if you doubt or can't remember]) and Danny Ferry got pump-faked.

[Wretch]

...and by "suckered", I don't mean he got sucked on a max deal. The deal was fine and sensible for us. I mean BK did not need to send anything to Phoenix beyond Diaw and MAYBE a token 1st. He just saw the perfect piece in Joe Johnson for his vision for a tall/interchangeable team and stupidly went all in on it.

Edited February 22, 2014 by Wretch

[MaceCase]

I just wanted to pop in here... Joe Johnson was a young/unproven 4th string for a contender. We gambled on a max deal for him, but that's not always going to turn out as well as it did for us. Sometimes, those deals become a crippling albatross. Those deals will always be out there, but for people on the Squawk who covet Danny's "smart" way of managing cap space and their reluctance to overspend or take a chance on guys like Turner/Jefferson/Tyreke...I don't see how people can get behind a deal like the one that brought JJ out of Phoenix.

Maybe not you specifically, but using the same context in which we got Joe...with this management team/direction? I figure most posters here won't go for a deal/gamble like that. More importantly, I don't see Danny Ferry going for a deal like that. IRONICALLY......

Ferry had the chance to make a ballsy play for JJ to bring him to Cleveland with LeBron. He balked because Phoenix threw that bullshit out there that they would match any offer for JJ (even a max) and he settled on Larry Hughes (which, being a LeBron fan at the time...and a former A.I./Philly follower...I thought was beyond stupid). JJ wanted out of Phoenix because they were being cheap with him and d#cking him around (he even said he felt disrespected). They were not going to match a max contract for their 4th option, they just worked up the price on him KNOWING he was leaving - BK got suckered (no surprise given JJ was the missing link at PG for his ridiculous all 6'8" team - which is where we were going to us him [link - click if you doubt or can't remember]) and Danny Ferry got pump-faked.

Well Harden was another positive example of a tertiary player that Houston gambled on to be their starter. The difference between the Joes, Stephenson's and Hardens as opposed to the Turners/Evans/Jeffersons is that they haven't plateaued as players or regressed going into their free agency so taking a chance on the former as opposed to the latter is far less of a risky gamble at that price. This is to speak nothing of them getting their stats as key contributors on winning and elite clubs as opposed to stat padding on a bottom feeder, of course. These are guys that you've seen promise and expect to grow on their own as opposed to guys that you feel you can "fix" in order to reach their potential.

I'm not advocating for a JJ deal where a whole menagerie of super duper valuable assets were exchanged in addition to a huge contract for his services, the contract alone should be able to net you a Stephenson much like it should have been able to net Joe. The risk as I stated should be worthwhile and not out of the realm of possibility giving that the Hawks have the money and a hole at SG and anything approaching 10 million a year is likely to put small market Indiana into the luxury tax.

What I called shenanigans on is someone stating that even with the willingness of the team wanting to offer the money that the players themselves wouldn't be willing to come to Atlanta over every other destination including frickin Charlotte. Charlotte...... seriously Charlotte. You have a person who has in the past constantly berated people for not going to see the Hawks at Phillips, called out a cheap ownership, and stated that a winning culture isn't going to attract prime free agents yet Charlotte is going to attract one for exactly those reasons. Charlotte which has had all of one winning season in their history of which not even this one can be included. Charlotte which has had as many draft foibles as the Hawks. Charlotte who can't fill their arena in the midst of their second ever playoff appearance. Smaller market Charlotte. Woe is the Hawks that because of Al Jefferson and a token playoff appearance in a historically weak East that Charlotte automatically shoots to the head of the class. A player such as Stephenson is going to say he wants no part of a team that wasn't in the playoffs the previous season (if they aren't a top 3 market) and forget that he battled hard against these very same Hawks not even a year prior in the playoffs.

We can talk about Danny's past failures in Cleveland but I would like to think he's learned since then. For instance, he didn't coddle Josh or make mad dash efforts to collect overpriced guys around our previous core in exchange for all of our assets and expirings. He didn't pursue any Larry Hughes in the past free agency either. We all know why he struck out on the big fish of the last free agency but that does not preclude him from being able to identify the right talent in the future. We can argue whether there would be a willingness but I have to draw the line when some wishy washy logic is being produced to say that players are so adverse to Atlanta that they'd pick worse fits and worse franchises just because.......that GM that laughably doesn't even need to be named.

[DJlaysitup]

Wow...those big long posts are intimidating...no way I'm reading all that sh!t if there isn't a test

Edited February 22, 2014 by DJlaysitup

[Wretch]

Well Harden was another positive example of a tertiary player that Houston gambled on to be their starter. The difference between the Joes, Stephenson's and Hardens as opposed to the Turners/Evans/Jeffersons is that they haven't plateaued as players or regressed going into their free agency so taking a chance on the former as opposed to the latter is far less of a risky gamble at that price. This is to speak nothing of them getting their stats as key contributors on winning and elite clubs as opposed to stat padding on a bottom feeder, of course. These are guys that you've seen promise and expect to grow on their own as opposed to guys that you feel you can "fix" in order to reach their potential.

I'm not advocating for a JJ deal where a whole menagerie of super duper valuable assets were exchanged in addition to a huge contract for his services, the contract alone should be able to net you a Stephenson much like it should have been able to net Joe. The risk as I stated should be worthwhile and not out of the realm of possibility giving that the Hawks have the money and a hole at SG and anything approaching 10 million a year is likely to put small market Indiana into the luxury tax.

What I called shenanigans on is someone stating that even with the willingness of the team wanting to offer the money that the players themselves wouldn't be willing to come to Atlanta over every other destination including frickin Charlotte. Charlotte...... seriously Charlotte. You have a person who has in the past constantly berated people for not going to see the Hawks at Phillips, called out a cheap ownership, and stated that a winning culture isn't going to attract prime free agents yet Charlotte is going to attract one for exactly those reasons. Charlotte which has had all of one winning season in their history of which not even this one can be included. Charlotte which has had as many draft foibles as the Hawks. Charlotte who can't fill their arena in the midst of their second ever playoff appearance. Smaller market Charlotte. Woe is the Hawks that because of Al Jefferson and a token playoff appearance in a historically weak East that Charlotte automatically shoots to the head of the class. A player such as Stephenson is going to say he wants no part of a team that wasn't in the playoffs the previous season (if they aren't a top 3 market) and forget that he battled hard against these very same Hawks not even a year prior in the playoffs.

We can talk about Danny's past failures in Cleveland but I would like to think he's learned since then. For instance, he didn't coddle Josh or make mad dash efforts to collect overpriced guys around our previous core in exchange for all of our assets and expirings. He didn't pursue any Larry Hughes in the past free agency either. We all know why he struck out on the big fish of the last free agency but that does not preclude him from being able to identify the right talent in the future. We can argue whether there would be a willingness but I have to draw the line when some wishy washy logic is being produced to say that players are so adverse to Atlanta that they'd pick worse fits and worse franchises just because.......that GM that laughably doesn't even need to be named.

Well, we're gonna agree to disagree on some of this. I understand the difference between peaked talent and a rising talent, but the point was moreso that people around here IMO seem to be overly sensitive about "risk" and cap space. A max deal for Joe was a risk coming out of Phoenix. Less so for a newly rebuilding team like ours THEN with cap room and years to burn; but comparatively, for a veteran team trying to climb out of the middle like we have NOW...I can't see these same people willing to jump on a deal like that (with or without the extra junk thrown in).

Funny that you lump Joe in with Harden, because the consensus around here was that Harden was NOTHING like Joe - I say that at the risk of indicting myself here, because I was of the opinion that Harden to us was just as risky as Joe (and I was WRONG! lol). Also, I don't think the Stephenson comparison is valid here unless you overpay for him. Maxing an unproven/up and coming talent is in no way the same as filling the hole in your starting lineup at his market value.

In any case, I disagree with you on Charlotte and I tend to side more with North on this. NOT because Charlotte is so attractive, but because I know how things play out and how quickly they change. It's good that you use the Bobcats as the example, because they are nothing like the ineptitude of the Clippers. Winning makes us forget things, but the Clippers have been a TERRIBLE organization...

They were the poster child for tanking.

They were in constant rebuild mode.

They were known for managerial ineptitude

They were known for being CHEAP

Their inability to do anything in the playoffs was as legendary as ours WITHOUT the benefit of actually making the playoffs.

...and yet, Chris Paul chose their organization over a chance to pair up with Howard and Horford here. All it takes is the right presence. Do we have that? No. Can we get it? Sure, but that's where we dance into the tank/stay competitive merry go round. I think I've said my piece on that enough. Ultimately, I think teams like the Bobcats are in a better position to become like the Clippers (recruiting/trade for top tier talent) than us IF we continue to fiddle around in the middle without lottery picks, without being able to offer most valuable player assets to get a blockbuster done, and without having the attractive core that players are prone to want to be a part of.

Nobody wants to come here and help us "compete" and we will have to seriously overpay for a young talent (who may even have to be seriously unproven) if he has more attractive options.

[Wretch]

One more thing too while we're on this...

Talking about Harden is irrelevant. It took two lottery picks to get this guy in Houston. We make the playoffs, we don't have those. Perhaps we could deal the rights to swap BKN's next year's pick and our own lottery pick IF we slide out of contention...but all that does is reinforce the position of us "rebuilders."

[MaceCase]

Well, we're gonna agree to disagree on some of this. I understand the difference between peaked talent and a rising talent, but the point was moreso that people around here IMO seem to be overly sensitive about "risk" and cap space. A max deal for Joe was a risk coming out of Phoenix. Less so for a newly rebuilding team like ours THEN with cap room and years to burn; but comparatively, for a veteran team trying to climb out of the middle like we have NOW...I can't see these same people willing to jump on a deal like that (with or without the extra junk thrown in).

Funny that you lump Joe in with Harden, because the consensus around here was that Harden was NOTHING like Joe - I say that at the risk of indicting myself here, because I was of the opinion that Harden to us was just as risky as Joe (and I was WRONG! lol). Also, I don't think the Stephenson comparison is valid here unless you overpay for him. Maxing an unproven/up and coming talent is in no way the same as filling the hole in your starting lineup at his market value.

In any case, I disagree with you on Charlotte and I tend to side more with North on this. NOT because Charlotte is so attractive, but because I know how things play out and how quickly they change. It's good that you use the Bobcats as the example, because they are nothing like the ineptitude of the Clippers. Winning makes us forget things, but the Clippers have been a TERRIBLE organization...

They were the poster child for tanking.

They were in constant rebuild mode.

They were known for managerial ineptitude

They were known for being CHEAP

Their inability to do anything in the playoffs was as legendary as ours WITHOUT the benefit of actually making the playoffs.

...and yet, Chris Paul chose their organization over a chance to pair up with Howard and Horford here. All it takes is the right presence. Do we have that? No. Can we get it? Sure, but that's where we dance into the tank/stay competitive merry go round. I think I've said my piece on that enough. Ultimately, I think teams like the Bobcats are in a better position to become like the Clippers (recruiting/trade for top tier talent) than us IF we continue to fiddle around in the middle without lottery picks, without being able to offer most valuable player assets to get a blockbuster done, and without having the attractive core that players are prone to want to be a part of.

Nobody wants to come here and help us "compete" and we will have to seriously overpay for a young talent (who may even have to be seriously unproven) if he has more attractive options.

Wretch......you have to see the absurdity of your comparison. It almost seems as if you are equating either of Al Jefferson and Kemba Walker to.......Blake Griffin. Need I say more on that? Do I need to post stats? All Star, All NBA, and Team USA selections? Youtubes of KIA, Subway, Jordan brand, etc. etc. etc. commercials? Kimmel appearances?

If you were to say free agents would pick Cleveland over Atlanta I could see that argument because they have Irving but Charlotte.....a team with neither stars, location or market......No, I'm not getting the "better position" vibe here. They are in the playoffs FYI, seeded ahead of the freefalling Hawks and it wouldn't matter either way because their pick is going to Chicago thanks to them deciding to pursue a playoff berth rather than tank during the most touted draft class in the past decade (sound familiar?).

When they threw 3 years and 40 million at Jefferson that was a clear symbol of them wishing to "fiddle around in the middle" so where exactly are you coming up with the idea they are in a "better position" ?

This is my point, every negative you can come with about Atlanta.....you can multiply it with Charlotte. Ownership, attendance/Southern apathy towards professional ball, market, talent, national spotlight? Yup, they are worse. Every move that people criticized about Ferry they duplicated: throwing money at veteran free agents? Check. Resigning underachieving draft prospects to lucrative deals? Check. They even just traded an expiring at the deadline for more vets to come help with the playoff push.

After this long march to mediocrity rather tanking they are at their best mark all season...at 3 games under .500 so where exactly does someone make the argument that come this very summer they'd be in a better position to attract talent than Atlanta?

That is what is blowing my mind.

[Wretch]

Wretch......you have to see the absurdity of your comparison. It almost seems as if you are equating either of Al Jefferson and Kemba Walker to.......Blake Griffin. Need I say more on that? Do I need to post stats? All Star, All NBA, and Team USA selections? Youtubes of KIA, Subway, Jordan brand, etc. etc. etc. commercials? Kimmel appearances?

If you were to say free agents would pick Cleveland over Atlanta I could see that argument because they have Irving but Charlotte.....a team with neither stars, location or market......No, I'm not getting the "better position" vibe here. They are in the playoffs FYI, seeded ahead of the freefalling Hawks and it wouldn't matter either way because their pick is going to Chicago thanks to them deciding to pursue a playoff berth rather than tank during the most touted draft class in the past decade (sound familiar?).

When they threw 3 years and 40 million at Jefferson that was a clear symbol of them wishing to "fiddle around in the middle" so where exactly are you coming up with the idea they are in a "better position" ?

This is my point, every negative you can come with about Atlanta.....you can multiply it with Charlotte. Ownership, attendance/Southern apathy towards professional ball, market, talent, national spotlight? Yup, they are worse. Every move that people criticized about Ferry they duplicated: throwing money at veteran free agents? Check. Resigning underachieving draft prospects to lucrative deals? Check. They even just traded an expiring at the deadline for more vets to come help with the playoff push.

After this long march to mediocrity rather tanking they are at their best mark all season...at 3 games under .500 so where exactly does someone make the argument that come this very summer they'd be in a better position to attract talent than Atlanta?

That is what is blowing my mind.

I get it dude.

We have a new GM. He is smart and has made a ton of smart/reasonable moves. He dumped JJ and Marvin. He secured possibly the most coveted coaching talent from a championship organization. You don't think I understand why you guys are so hopeful? I get it. But, none of these smart, balanced, competitive moves will turn us around.

The problem is that your POV is static. You are so focused on the fact that Charlotte is a bad team that you cannot see beyond their current situation and you cannot understand any point of view but your own. But my view is not static and I'm looking far beyond the here and now. I'm not drawing a comparison to the talent level of the Bobcats vs. the Clippers. I'm demonstrating to you that fortunes turn around in the blink of an eye - and Charlotte has the assets to make it happen.

Middle of the pack team? Sure, by virtue of a terrible year that no one foresaw. You can't keep holding onto that. There are six teams, to include us, that everyone expected to be far ahead of them in the standings. They weren't shooting for the playoffs, they were bringing in talent when they brought in Jefferson. If the young guys blossomed...great.

If not, more assets. And they've got enough now that they are primed to make something happen. Meanwhile, what we got? Some veteran journeymen, some mid/late 1sts, some 2nd rounders? You guys don't see that these types of assets are not what's used to get the game changing deals done. It's what Charlotte has. It's what the Clippers had. It's what Boston had.

I think I'm done with the Merry-Go-Round again. I'm not saying we CAN'T lure a marquee free agent or that we CAN'T land a game changer outside of the lottery. I'm not saying that Ferry can't pull off a Houston somehow and get a lottery pick or two somehow without rebuilding. I'm saying it isn't very likely.I'm not saying that Charlotte IS going to get all the free agents we want or that they are going to draft the next Kevin Durant and shoot to the top of the East. I'm saying that they are in a better position to do that by adopting the REBUILDING methodology and because they have stockpiled the kind of young talent that gets FRANCHISE CHANGING deals done.

I'm also saying that the best thing that can happen to this team right now is a trip down the toilet. Right to the bottom of the standings. Charlotte has been there and by all accounts should have been there this year and are better off for it.

Man I can't wait to revisit all this in 10 years...feels like the late 90's/early 2000's all over again for me..

[Admin]

Now this is getting good like I hoped in the beginning. Good to see TheWretchedAuthorWritesAgain back in business and stirring up debate with our other authors.

[PSSSHHHRRR87]

All these long posts...

[turnermx]

I know, If i wasnt studying i would have time to read them. These guys should be given honorary PhD in Literature or something lol Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MaceCase]

I get it dude.

We have a new GM. He is smart and has made a ton of smart/reasonable moves. He dumped JJ and Marvin. He secured possibly the most coveted coaching talent from a championship organization. You don't think I understand why you guys are so hopeful? I get it. But, none of these smart, balanced, competitive moves will turn us around.

The problem is that your POV is static. You are so focused on the fact that Charlotte is a bad team that you cannot see beyond their current situation and you cannot understand any point of view but your own. But my view is not static and I'm looking far beyond the here and now. I'm not drawing a comparison to the talent level of the Bobcats vs. the Clippers. I'm demonstrating to you that fortunes turn around in the blink of an eye - and Charlotte has the assets to make it happen.

Middle of the pack team? Sure, by virtue of a terrible year that no one foresaw. You can't keep holding onto that. There are six teams, to include us, that everyone expected to be far ahead of them in the standings. They weren't shooting for the playoffs, they were bringing in talent when they brought in Jefferson. If the young guys blossomed...great.

If not, more assets. And they've got enough now that they are primed to make something happen. Meanwhile, what we got? Some veteran journeymen, some mid/late 1sts, some 2nd rounders? You guys don't see that these types of assets are not what's used to get the game changing deals done. It's what Charlotte has. It's what the Clippers had. It's what Boston had.

I think I'm done with the Merry-Go-Round again. I'm not saying we CAN'T lure a marquee free agent or that we CAN'T land a game changer outside of the lottery. I'm not saying that Ferry can't pull off a Houston somehow and get a lottery pick or two somehow without rebuilding. I'm saying it isn't very likely.I'm not saying that Charlotte IS going to get all the free agents we want or that they are going to draft the next Kevin Durant and shoot to the top of the East. I'm saying that they are in a better position to do that by adopting the REBUILDING methodology and because they have stockpiled the kind of young talent that gets FRANCHISE CHANGING deals done.

I'm also saying that the best thing that can happen to this team right now is a trip down the toilet. Right to the bottom of the standings. Charlotte has been there and by all accounts should have been there this year and are better off for it.

Man I can't wait to revisit all this in 10 years...feels like the late 90's/early 2000's all over again for me..

No, I don't think you get it. I think the only way that you could be farther away from getting it is if you fell off the edge of the universe.

You can't accuse someone of having a point of view that is static while your own point of view is muddled in the past. Toronto, Detroit, Cleveland, Washington and Charlotte were all teams that didn't make the playoffs in the previous year(s). They are also all teams that made big money moves to add veteran talent to their teams over the past summer(s). All 5 of those teams are either in or within games of the playoffs. You cannot expect me to believe that teams spending copious amounts of money on older vets are doing it with the intention of remaining terrible......ESPECIALLY when you are hypercritical of our own GM saying that his doing so is an effort to maintain the Hawks as a middle of the road team.

If team X is a playoff team and makes a move to maintain seeding and team Y is not a playoff team but makes a similar move to team X then clearly team Y is therefore attempting to move up into playoff seeding, no? You do not throw a 13.5 million annual salary at a 29 year old for "veteran presence". You do not throw a 13.5 million annual salary at someone you expect to be a role player. You throw a 13.5 million dollar annual contract at someone you expect to be difference maker. In the NBA difference makers have a direct impact particularly on wins. Each win that your new difference maker helps provide for your team moves you further and further away from the "sweet spot" of the lottery that you used to occupy. Again, you do not throw a 13.5 million annual salary at a 29 year old as "talent acquisition" while your young players grow because he will be well out of his prime before they have even gotten close to theirs. This isn't a differing of views this is one person being oblivious to the past and present while talking of predicting the future.

You can't claim that Toronto, Charlotte, Detroit, Washington and Cleveland are surprised to be where they are....well actually Cleveland and Detroit are surprised.......they are surprised NOT to be in the playoffs. This isn't some fluke of the East being weak, these teams are all directly correlated and responsible for the East being Universally weak. They expected to all be right about where there are right now in the standings.....only with better records.

You can't speak of one person having a static point of view then talk of fortune changing at the drop of the hat but then be oblivious of GMs and teams making moves to improve....Hello, they are doing so because standings aren't static and fortune can change at the drop of the hat....... If you truly think you have zero chance of improving based on pundits projections then why spend that kind of money specifically on players with limited windows? They are looking to be upstarts.

Let's do some analysis and look to the past of all of these teams and what they have in common. They are all at the tail end of meandering rebuilds. They are all in the place where anti-tankers fear being, 3, 4, 5 years into the lottery and still no end in sight except hoping on the same dream that they hoped on the previous 3,4,5 years to finally coming true. They aren't fresh into the fray, they about damn ready to see these "assets" actually pay off.

Let's look at the present now. Those that actually managed to luck into franchise level players (Cleveland, Washington, Detroit maybe with Drummond) are scrambling to surround them with veterans over collecting more young guys because they want to establish a winning culture. They want their 'birds in the hand' to feel that there is a sense of progress rather than continuing to roll out teams that are no better than when they first got there. Why? Because of asset retention, winning programs don't just work to attract outsiders to come join you they also convince your insiders to stay. Those that haven't had as much luck in the lotto (Toronto, Charlotte) have had enough of the search for a star in the draft and building towards a balanced team.

Now let's look at the future and wrap this back up with the team of discussion, Charlotte. We've already gone over the expectations one should have when signing a 29 year old vet to a 13 million dollar annual contract (I had to) so let's make mention of how that effects future assets. Each win that a player of his caliber likely accounts for already lessens their chances within the lotto whether or not you actually believed them to at the maximum challenge for a 7th/8th seed. Them actually being in the playoffs takes away all lotto chances...their 2014 pick is now a mid first.....not better than what the Hawks have/intended to have...worse considering that they won't have any pick outside of the top 10

Now if a team makes the playoffs it's a hard sell for the GM to say "ahh, we f***ed up, that wasn't supposed to happen, I'm tearing this bitch back down." No, we can rationally expect that they will work to improve on their current playoff run by making moves similar to what they did at the deadline by acquiring more vets. This means that their future picks are now likely going to be defined as #14 and up or just as bad, within the late lottery. So, we can just assume that their future assets are in peril according to the "Get a Star" guidebook.

Let's now look at their past assets. While in the lotto they came away with Henderson, Walker, Biyombo, Kidd-Gilchrist and Zeller at 12, 7, 9, 2 and 4. As it stands, only Walker has distinguished himself as a player worth a damn and it's of the low efficiency Jamal Crawford/Tyreke Evans type. Henderson has proven to be a fringe rotation player that they resigned to a contract that may be considered an overpay if you are to use the same criteria that we use to define Jeffrey Teague as underperforming. Biyombo is frantically fighting off comparisons of being the second coming of Saer Sene. Kidd-Gilchrist looks he should change his name to Kidd-Childress and then Zeller is an unknown but both he and Biyombo's development is hurt by having a 29 year old vet signed to a 13 million dollar annual contract (I had to again) playing at their position.

Draft picks are like eggs. GM's fawn over their unhatched sacks of yolk because there is nothing but the unknown and potential. Once these picks become players and players get on the court....they've hatched. B-R starts tabulating their stats, SportsVU/Synergy starts watching their every move and they are out there before the eyes of thousands every night against NBA talent. You start to learn pretty soon off the bat whether you have a golden nugget, perhaps even a golden goose that will lay even more golden eggs for you, a regular ole chick or just rotten yolk. Fans and GMs alike no longer care where you were drafted, they care about what you can do.

So to summarize:

Charlotte has location and ownership issues similar to their Hawks.

They will be picking in the mid-late 1st similar to the Hawks.

And their collected menagerie of youngster doesn't look like it will fetch them a greater prize than the collection of Childress, Marvin, Shelden and Acie fetched the Hawks.

No, I see no way that they've separated themselves from the Hawks in the near future and have gotten ahead in the race to become the new Clippers......If anything they look completely like the new Hawks. Heck, we can extend that out to a decade but again, you're giving the Bobcats the benefit of the doubt despite their current projection while condemning the Hawks because of their current projection. Unfair, hypocritical, wishy-washy, or pure haterism. Call it what you want but the logic isn't stacking up.

[nathan2331]

One thing to note, we DO have assets. While they may not be seen as lucrative as other teams, Horford and Millsap are signed to some of the best value contracts in the league (besides rookie and max contracts). We also have Mike Scott and our two rookies, Dennis and Bebe (two players with almost as much potential as anybody else in that draft).

[HawkItus]

No, I don't think you get it. I think the only way that you could be farther away from getting it is if you fell off the edge of the universe.

You can't accuse someone of having a point of view that is static while your own point of view is muddled in the past. Toronto, Detroit, Cleveland, Washington and Charlotte were all teams that didn't make the playoffs in the previous year(s). They are also all teams that made big money moves to add veteran talent to their teams over the past summer(s). All 5 of those teams are either in or within games of the playoffs. You cannot expect me to believe that teams spending copious amounts of money on older vets are doing it with the intention of remaining terrible......ESPECIALLY when you are hypercritical of our own GM saying that his doing so is an effort to maintain the Hawks as a middle of the road team.

If team X is a playoff team and makes a move to maintain seeding and team Y is not a playoff team but makes a similar move to team X then clearly team Y is therefore attempting to move up into playoff seeding, no? You do not throw a 13.5 million annual salary at a 29 year old for "veteran presence". You do not throw a 13.5 million annual salary at someone you expect to be a role player. You throw a 13.5 million dollar annual contract at someone you expect to be difference maker. In the NBA difference makers have a direct impact particularly on wins. Each win that your new difference maker helps provide for your team moves you further and further away from the "sweet spot" of the lottery that you used to occupy. Again, you do not throw a 13.5 million annual salary at a 29 year old as "talent acquisition" while your young players grow because he will be well out of his prime before they have even gotten close to theirs. This isn't a differing of views this is one person being oblivious to the past and present while talking of predicting the future.

You can't claim that Toronto, Charlotte, Detroit, Washington and Cleveland are surprised to be where they are....well actually Cleveland and Detroit are surprised.......they are surprised NOT to be in the playoffs. This isn't some fluke of the East being weak, these teams are all directly correlated and responsible for the East being Universally weak. They expected to all be right about where there are right now in the standings.....only with better records.

You can't speak of one person having a static point of view then talk of fortune changing at the drop of the hat but then be oblivious of GMs and teams making moves to improve....Hello, they are doing so because standings aren't static and fortune can change at the drop of the hat....... If you truly think you have zero chance of improving based on pundits projections then why spend that kind of money specifically on players with limited windows? They are looking to be upstarts.

Let's do some analysis and look to the past of all of these teams and what they have in common. They are all at the tail end of meandering rebuilds. They are all in the place where anti-tankers fear being, 3, 4, 5 years into the lottery and still no end in sight except hoping on the same dream that they hoped on the previous 3,4,5 years to finally coming true. They aren't fresh into the fray, they about damn ready to see these "assets" actually pay off.

Let's look at the present now. Those that actually managed to luck into franchise level players (Cleveland, Washington, Detroit maybe with Drummond) are scrambling to surround them with veterans over collecting more young guys because they want to establish a winning culture. They want their 'birds in the hand' to feel that there is a sense of progress rather than continuing to roll out teams that are no better than when they first got there. Why? Because of asset retention, winning programs don't just work to attract outsiders to come join you they also convince your insiders to stay. Those that haven't had as much luck in the lotto (Toronto, Charlotte) have had enough of the search for a star in the draft and building towards a balanced team.

Now let's look at the future and wrap this back up with the team of discussion, Charlotte. We've already gone over the expectations one should have when signing a 29 year old vet to a 13 million dollar annual contract (I had to) so let's make mention of how that effects future assets. Each win that a player of his caliber likely accounts for already lessens their chances within the lotto whether or not you actually believed them to at the maximum challenge for a 7th/8th seed. Them actually being in the playoffs takes away all lotto chances...their 2014 pick is now a mid first.....not better than what the Hawks have/intended to have...worse considering that they won't have any pick outside of the top 10

Now if a team makes the playoffs it's a hard sell for the GM to say "ahh, we f***ed up, that wasn't supposed to happen, I'm tearing this bitch back down." No, we can rationally expect that they will work to improve on their current playoff run by making moves similar to what they did at the deadline by acquiring more vets. This means that their future picks are now likely going to be defined as #14 and up or just as bad, within the late lottery. So, we can just assume that their future assets are in peril according to the "Get a Star" guidebook.

Let's now look at their past assets. While in the lotto they came away with Henderson, Walker, Biyombo, Kidd-Gilchrist and Zeller at 12, 7, 9, 2 and 4. As it stands, only Walker has distinguished himself as a player worth a damn and it's of the low efficiency Jamal Crawford/Tyreke Evans type. Henderson has proven to be a fringe rotation player that they resigned to a contract that may be considered an overpay if you are to use the same criteria that we use to define Jeffrey Teague as underperforming. Biyombo is frantically fighting off comparisons of being the second coming of Saer Sene. Kidd-Gilchrist looks he should change his name to Kidd-Childress and then Zeller is an unknown but both he and Biyombo's development is hurt by having a 29 year old vet signed to a 13 million dollar annual contract (I had to again) playing at their position.

Draft picks are like eggs. GM's fawn over their unhatched sacks of yolk because there is nothing but the unknown and potential. Once these picks become players and players get on the court....they've hatched. B-R starts tabulating their stats, SportsVU/Synergy starts watching their every move and they are out there before the eyes of thousands every night against NBA talent. You start to learn pretty soon off the bat whether you have a golden nugget, perhaps even a golden goose that will lay even more golden eggs for you, a regular ole chick or just rotten yolk. Fans and GMs alike no longer care where you were drafted, they care about what you can do.

So to summarize:

Charlotte has location and ownership issues similar to their Hawks.

They will be picking in the mid-late 1st similar to the Hawks.

And their collected menagerie of youngster doesn't look like it will fetch them a greater prize than the collection of Childress, Marvin, Shelden and Acie fetched the Hawks.

No, I see no way that they've separated themselves from the Hawks in the near future and have gotten ahead in the race to become the new Clippers......If anything they look completely like the new Hawks. Heck, we can extend that out to a decade but again, you're giving the Bobcats the benefit of the doubt despite their current projection while condemning the Hawks because of their current projection. Unfair, hypocritical, wishy-washy, or pure haterism. Call it what you want but the logic isn't stacking up.

Damn good post and the point I have championed through all these exercises. But, guess what they will only skim over what you are saying and continue to chase the pipe of this supposed "Superstar" in the draft that will magically win titles. Or the trade that we can't seem to make that nets us Lebron for expiring contracts. Meanwhile others are insane for thinking maybe if the team is culturally enticing that maybe we get a JJ 2.0 that will actually recruit other guys to come.

[Vol4ever]

I get it dude.

We have a new GM. He is smart and has made a ton of smart/reasonable moves. He dumped JJ and Marvin. He secured possibly the most coveted coaching talent from a championship organization. You don't think I understand why you guys are so hopeful? I get it. But, none of these smart, balanced, competitive moves will turn us around.

The problem is that your POV is static. You are so focused on the fact that Charlotte is a bad team that you cannot see beyond their current situation and you cannot understand any point of view but your own. But my view is not static and I'm looking far beyond the here and now. I'm not drawing a comparison to the talent level of the Bobcats vs. the Clippers. I'm demonstrating to you that fortunes turn around in the blink of an eye - and Charlotte has the assets to make it happen.

Middle of the pack team? Sure, by virtue of a terrible year that no one foresaw. You can't keep holding onto that. There are six teams, to include us, that everyone expected to be far ahead of them in the standings. They weren't shooting for the playoffs, they were bringing in talent when they brought in Jefferson. If the young guys blossomed...great.

If not, more assets. And they've got enough now that they are primed to make something happen. Meanwhile, what we got? Some veteran journeymen, some mid/late 1sts, some 2nd rounders? You guys don't see that these types of assets are not what's used to get the game changing deals done. It's what Charlotte has. It's what the Clippers had. It's what Boston had.

I think I'm done with the Merry-Go-Round again. I'm not saying we CAN'T lure a marquee free agent or that we CAN'T land a game changer outside of the lottery. I'm not saying that Ferry can't pull off a Houston somehow and get a lottery pick or two somehow without rebuilding. I'm saying it isn't very likely.I'm not saying that Charlotte IS going to get all the free agents we want or that they are going to draft the next Kevin Durant and shoot to the top of the East. I'm saying that they are in a better position to do that by adopting the REBUILDING methodology and because they have stockpiled the kind of young talent that gets FRANCHISE CHANGING deals done.

I'm also saying that the best thing that can happen to this team right now is a trip down the toilet. Right to the bottom of the standings. Charlotte has been there and by all accounts should have been there this year and are better off for it.

Man I can't wait to revisit all this in 10 years...feels like the late 90's/early 2000's all over again for me..

Well said and I agree 110%. It amazes me that folks think the assets we have will bring us a game changer, I just don't see it.

[Admin]

:popcorn:

[Sothron]

Well said and I agree 110%. It amazes me that folks think the assets we have will bring us a game changer, I just don't see it.

The kinda sad thing is we did flip some of these guys for a superstar like Love...what's left here to keep that guy here?

[Vol4ever]

The kinda sad thing is we did flip some of these guys for a superstar like Love...what's left here to keep that guy here?

Agreed, if you sent them Horford, Millsap, and a couple 1st rounders then we still have nothing. Like was said earlier....we are on a merry go round

[Guest]

[Wretch]

No, I don't think you get it. I think the only way that you could be farther away from getting it is if you fell off the edge of the universe.

You can't accuse someone of having a point of view that is static while your own point of view is muddled in the past. Toronto, Detroit, Cleveland, Washington and Charlotte were all teams that didn't make the playoffs in the previous year(s). They are also all teams that made big money moves to add veteran talent to their teams over the past summer(s). All 5 of those teams are either in or within games of the playoffs. You cannot expect me to believe that teams spending copious amounts of money on older vets are doing it with the intention of remaining terrible......ESPECIALLY when you are hypercritical of our own GM saying that his doing so is an effort to maintain the Hawks as a middle of the road team.

If team X is a playoff team and makes a move to maintain seeding and team Y is not a playoff team but makes a similar move to team X then clearly team Y is therefore attempting to move up into playoff seeding, no? You do not throw a 13.5 million annual salary at a 29 year old for "veteran presence". You do not throw a 13.5 million annual salary at someone you expect to be a role player. You throw a 13.5 million dollar annual contract at someone you expect to be difference maker. In the NBA difference makers have a direct impact particularly on wins. Each win that your new difference maker helps provide for your team moves you further and further away from the "sweet spot" of the lottery that you used to occupy. Again, you do not throw a 13.5 million annual salary at a 29 year old as "talent acquisition" while your young players grow because he will be well out of his prime before they have even gotten close to theirs. This isn't a differing of views this is one person being oblivious to the past and present while talking of predicting the future.

You can't claim that Toronto, Charlotte, Detroit, Washington and Cleveland are surprised to be where they are....well actually Cleveland and Detroit are surprised.......they are surprised NOT to be in the playoffs. This isn't some fluke of the East being weak, these teams are all directly correlated and responsible for the East being Universally weak. They expected to all be right about where there are right now in the standings.....only with better records.

You can't speak of one person having a static point of view then talk of fortune changing at the drop of the hat but then be oblivious of GMs and teams making moves to improve....Hello, they are doing so because standings aren't static and fortune can change at the drop of the hat....... If you truly think you have zero chance of improving based on pundits projections then why spend that kind of money specifically on players with limited windows? They are looking to be upstarts.

Let's do some analysis and look to the past of all of these teams and what they have in common. They are all at the tail end of meandering rebuilds. They are all in the place where anti-tankers fear being, 3, 4, 5 years into the lottery and still no end in sight except hoping on the same dream that they hoped on the previous 3,4,5 years to finally coming true. They aren't fresh into the fray, they about damn ready to see these "assets" actually pay off.

Let's look at the present now. Those that actually managed to luck into franchise level players (Cleveland, Washington, Detroit maybe with Drummond) are scrambling to surround them with veterans over collecting more young guys because they want to establish a winning culture. They want their 'birds in the hand' to feel that there is a sense of progress rather than continuing to roll out teams that are no better than when they first got there. Why? Because of asset retention, winning programs don't just work to attract outsiders to come join you they also convince your insiders to stay. Those that haven't had as much luck in the lotto (Toronto, Charlotte) have had enough of the search for a star in the draft and building towards a balanced team.

Now let's look at the future and wrap this back up with the team of discussion, Charlotte. We've already gone over the expectations one should have when signing a 29 year old vet to a 13 million dollar annual contract (I had to) so let's make mention of how that effects future assets. Each win that a player of his caliber likely accounts for already lessens their chances within the lotto whether or not you actually believed them to at the maximum challenge for a 7th/8th seed. Them actually being in the playoffs takes away all lotto chances...their 2014 pick is now a mid first.....not better than what the Hawks have/intended to have...worse considering that they won't have any pick outside of the top 10

Now if a team makes the playoffs it's a hard sell for the GM to say "ahh, we f***ed up, that wasn't supposed to happen, I'm tearing this bitch back down." No, we can rationally expect that they will work to improve on their current playoff run by making moves similar to what they did at the deadline by acquiring more vets. This means that their future picks are now likely going to be defined as #14 and up or just as bad, within the late lottery. So, we can just assume that their future assets are in peril according to the "Get a Star" guidebook.

Let's now look at their past assets. While in the lotto they came away with Henderson, Walker, Biyombo, Kidd-Gilchrist and Zeller at 12, 7, 9, 2 and 4. As it stands, only Walker has distinguished himself as a player worth a damn and it's of the low efficiency Jamal Crawford/Tyreke Evans type. Henderson has proven to be a fringe rotation player that they resigned to a contract that may be considered an overpay if you are to use the same criteria that we use to define Jeffrey Teague as underperforming. Biyombo is frantically fighting off comparisons of being the second coming of Saer Sene. Kidd-Gilchrist looks he should change his name to Kidd-Childress and then Zeller is an unknown but both he and Biyombo's development is hurt by having a 29 year old vet signed to a 13 million dollar annual contract (I had to again) playing at their position.

Draft picks are like eggs. GM's fawn over their unhatched sacks of yolk because there is nothing but the unknown and potential. Once these picks become players and players get on the court....they've hatched. B-R starts tabulating their stats, SportsVU/Synergy starts watching their every move and they are out there before the eyes of thousands every night against NBA talent. You start to learn pretty soon off the bat whether you have a golden nugget, perhaps even a golden goose that will lay even more golden eggs for you, a regular ole chick or just rotten yolk. Fans and GMs alike no longer care where you were drafted, they care about what you can do.

So to summarize:

Charlotte has location and ownership issues similar to their Hawks.

They will be picking in the mid-late 1st similar to the Hawks.

And their collected menagerie of youngster doesn't look like it will fetch them a greater prize than the collection of Childress, Marvin, Shelden and Acie fetched the Hawks.

No, I see no way that they've separated themselves from the Hawks in the near future and have gotten ahead in the race to become the new Clippers......If anything they look completely like the new Hawks. Heck, we can extend that out to a decade but again, you're giving the Bobcats the benefit of the doubt despite their current projection while condemning the Hawks because of their current projection. Unfair, hypocritical, wishy-washy, or pure haterism. Call it what you want but the logic isn't stacking up.

You're putting these two teams at the same point in development life cycle...and it invalidates a great deal of what you're trying to say here. The Hawks throwing a massive contract (or even a reasonably sized contract like Millsap) at a player does not warrant the same expectations as a 21 win team throwing a massive contract at a player. Especially a player that has not elevated anyone to anything. Of course the move was made to improve the team. Everyone is looking to improve. Always. But when Team Y is basically THE worst team in the league, two years running, then they are not even IN the seeding...let alone planning to move up in it.

The move was to acquire talent and PERHAPS slide into the playoffs - which would have been awesome for a team that a season prior mustered up a whopping 7 wins. Not comparable and not an awesome move for a team like ours who has no hope of rising out of the middle of the pack and no YOUNG lottery assets to groom. If you can't see that, then there really is no point to this conversation.

Have they "screwed up?" Not at all.

Financially? They have no real salary beyond next season. They're fine. Player development in trouble? That's the most valid point you make. But it's not like you can't bench Jefferson and focus on development. They might have overpaid a little, but he doesn't have an albatross of a contract - they could move him if it was a real problem. Future picks in trouble? Nope. For one, this is a rebuilding team (despite what you think about the East) that probably expected to be rebuilding this season or sliding into the bottom of the playoffs. More importantly, they can afford to gamble on a low seeded playoff birth. Hell, the core of that team is a fat lottery crop that has like...a combined 4 1/2 years of experience (please don't reach beyond Jordan's acquisition and his intention to rebuild). If they put these guys on the block they could turn a Boston or LAC faster than we could...unless we're offering Horford/Millsap (which we are not).