Moderators AHF Posted March 23, 2016 Moderators Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 hour ago, bumpyphish1 said: Calling me an a-hole and moron MOD HAT ON Knock off the name calling. It is always unnecessary when talking with fellow Hawks fans on this site. Treat each other with a baseline of respect even if you think the argument someone is making doesn't deserve it -- the person still does. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumpyphish1 Posted March 23, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 35 minutes ago, AHF said: You will never hear me singing Marvin's praises. Man is dead to me. He has, however, put up higher PER and WS/48 numbers than every single shooting guard or small forward on our team this season. (That is not singing his praises - it is damning him with faint praise). I agree. He has been a serviceable low end Sf this season for the Hornets. But, he is not the SF on a championship-caliber team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJlaysitup Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Well anyway...it's a tough call IMO as far as the Hawks post-season. As a Hawks fan I fear dropping down. If I were a fan of another (non-Cav) team I would fear the damned Hawks. I just don't know if we can get back to the ECFs without DMC. (hoping) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJlaysitup Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 4 hours ago, AHF said: You will never hear me singing Marvin's praises. Man is dead to me. He has, however, put up higher PER and WS/48 numbers than every single shooting guard or small forward on our team this season. (That is not singing his praises - it is damning him with faint praise). +++ Marvin must have finally played in a big pool tournament and realized how hard positional 9-ball really is. I thought I was good at it until I played guys who could leave the cue-ball on a dime for their next shot. Now Marvin probably figures he better get his arse in gear if he wants another contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NekiEcko Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 It has been a while for me since I post here but I will drop my opinion in this. 1. Let Al look around in FA - I know that we have the best advantage when it comes down to resigning him because of the five year and able to go over in the cap to resign him but he has given his all in Atlanta since he was drafted here from the times he want to play PF not Center to dealing with those freak injuries. I believe he should have the chance to look around and check things out for himself and his family. For me, I would love for him to finish his days in Atlanta and I would be surprised if he does go or even stay. 2. Teague has to be traded period - I understand that two good point guards is very important for a championship team, like how GS did but I believe that it is time to get Dennis the chance to be a everyday starter and I believe we can solve our Wing Issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted March 24, 2016 Premium Member Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 9 minutes ago, NekiEcko said: It has been a while for me since I post here but I will drop my opinion in this. 1. Let Al look around in FA - I know that we have the best advantage when it comes down to resigning him because of the five year and able to go over in the cap to resign him but he has given his all in Atlanta since he was drafted here from the times he want to play PF not Center to dealing with those freak injuries. I believe he should have the chance to look around and check things out for himself and his family. For me, I would love for him to finish his days in Atlanta and I would be surprised if he does go or even stay. 2. Teague has to be traded period - I understand that two good point guards is very important for a championship team, like how GS did but I believe that it is time to get Dennis the chance to be a everyday starter and I believe we can solve our Wing Issues. You don't solve a wing issue by giving up a PG. Don't trade Teague just to trade him.... that's crazy. If you want to solve the wing problem, go out and sign Batum or Barnes. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDog90 Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 5 hours ago, bumpyphish1 said: I agree. He has been a serviceable low end Sf this season for the Hornets. But, he is not the SF on a championship-caliber team. He's a PF for the Hornets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumpyphish1 Posted March 24, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 37 minutes ago, BigDog90 said: He's a PF for the Hornets. Cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NekiEcko Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 8 hours ago, Diesel said: You don't solve a wing issue by giving up a PG. Don't trade Teague just to trade him.... that's crazy. If you want to solve the wing problem, go out and sign Batum or Barnes. I am just guessing for right now, but I don't think that Teague is going to be here next year, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazer Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 16 hours ago, bumpyphish1 said: I agree. He has been a serviceable low end Sf this season for the Hornets. But, he is not the SF on a championship-caliber team. 10 hours ago, BigDog90 said: He's a PF for the Hornets. Now now @BigDog90, as @bumpyphish1 already informed us earlier in this thread, he is "thinking on a superior level" to us. Let's not question his elevated basketball knowledge. We'll let you slide this once, assuming you missed that..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Jody23 Posted March 24, 2016 Premium Member Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Something that will play a factor in what they decide to do is the continued growth of Dennis and his desire to be a starter. Bud doesn't like playing both of them together and it's probably going to be a bigger challenge to give them both the minutes they deserve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rd79 Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 (edited) What about keeping Dennis + Jeff and making Dennis the starting PG? At some point you even have to think about it... PER36 + advanced numbers Edited March 24, 2016 by rd79 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted March 24, 2016 Premium Member Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 3 hours ago, NekiEcko said: I am just guessing for right now, but I don't think that Teague is going to be here next year, in my opinion. It's a popular opinion, however, I think this post season will dictate. I think Bud will find success in keeping them both. If not, why get rid of Mack? Mack is balling in Utah. 12.9 ppg, 5.9 apg, 45.5% from three... Everything he was off the bench for us. (especially in the playoffs where Schro suffered). We elected to develop Schro as our second PG. Not to put Teague out... But to have two speedy PGs. I'll put it like this. San Antonio had a similar situation with George Hill. Schro is the new George Hill. He looks as good if not better than the starter (because he plays against other reserves). However, San Antonio elected to stay with Parker and trade Hill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Waste of resources to keep both PGs unless one of them learns to play off of the ball and I'd choose to go with the younger one. The strange thing is Teague was a good off ball player at Wake Forest but that has not translated at all! If he's not on the ball, he does not do well offensively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Jody23 Posted March 24, 2016 Premium Member Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 22 minutes ago, Diesel said: It's a popular opinion, however, I think this post season will dictate. I think Bud will find success in keeping them both. If not, why get rid of Mack? Mack is balling in Utah. 12.9 ppg, 5.9 apg, 45.5% from three... Everything he was off the bench for us. (especially in the playoffs where Schro suffered). We elected to develop Schro as our second PG. Not to put Teague out... But to have two speedy PGs. I'll put it like this. San Antonio had a similar situation with George Hill. Schro is the new George Hill. He looks as good if not better than the starter (because he plays against other reserves). However, San Antonio elected to stay with Parker and trade Hill. Mack was moved, in part, as a favor to Mack. Bud admitted that in an interview following the deadline. Dennis looking good because he plays solely against reserves is not true. He does his fair share against starters as well. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators AHF Posted March 24, 2016 Moderators Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 56 minutes ago, Jody23 said: Mack was moved, in part, as a favor to Mack. Bud admitted that in an interview following the deadline. Agreed. There was no basketball reason for that trade other than clearing Mack off the books for next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 55 minutes ago, AHF said: Agreed. There was no basketball reason for that trade other than clearing Mack off the books for next season. Slightly confused here, "Mack off the books" isn't a basketball reason though? The Mack trade had the subtle impact of allowing the Hawks to start the off-season over the cap so long as the cap doesn't rise above $95 million (all because of Kirk's Bird Rights giving him a ~$5.5m cap hold). This helps safeguard the scenario that Al wants to leave via sign-and-trade and the Hawks think they will be better off operating above the cap the whole off-season (hiiiiighly unlikely, but still possible). Mack has a non-guaranteed contract, so it's not like trading him was necessary if all you wanted to do was clear him off the books. But not trading for Kirk would have left the Hawks vulnerable to not being able to operate over the cap if the cap ended up slightly north of $90m. [numbers probably off because I'm too lazy to look them up] But I think you're saying the Mack trade was done for cap-ish reasons and not basketball reasons? Which, yeah I think that's right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators AHF Posted March 24, 2016 Moderators Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 25 minutes ago, hawksfanatic said: Slightly confused here, "Mack off the books" isn't a basketball reason though? The Mack trade had the subtle impact of allowing the Hawks to start the off-season over the cap so long as the cap doesn't rise above $95 million (all because of Kirk's Bird Rights giving him a ~$5.5m cap hold). This helps safeguard the scenario that Al wants to leave via sign-and-trade and the Hawks think they will be better off operating above the cap the whole off-season (hiiiiighly unlikely, but still possible). Mack has a non-guaranteed contract, so it's not like trading him was necessary if all you wanted to do was clear him off the books. But not trading for Kirk would have left the Hawks vulnerable to not being able to operate over the cap if the cap ended up slightly north of $90m. [numbers probably off because I'm too lazy to look them up] But I think you're saying the Mack trade was done for cap-ish reasons and not basketball reasons? Which, yeah I think that's right. Yeah, I mixed my messages. Was saying there was zero basketball reason for the trade (we are worse this season for it). The only reason other than doing Mack a favor for the trade is the minor cap flexibility this offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNorthCydeRises Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 The issue with Teague and Dennis, is that they have to be able to play with each other, especially on the defensive end. As I said on a past thread, one of them would have to become the defensive equivalent of Joe Dumars, or at least Avery Bradley and Rajon Rondo, in order for them to be successful on the floor together. They'd have to be able to at least slow down guys like Bradley Beal, Klay Thompson, and Demarr Derozan. We can't do like Golden State tried to do with Curry and Monta Ellis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators AHF Posted March 24, 2016 Moderators Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Agreed, @TheNorthCydeRises. Defense is the biggest challenge for those two working together. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now