The Tank Thread

[Diesel]

1 minute ago, REHawksFan said:

I'm trying to reconcile the following facts:

1. Atlanta is neither a destination city nor a prestige franchise so attracting Elite FA has historically been a non-starter;
2. Trading for Elite NBA players requires giving up comparable assets (which the Hawks have never had) OR taking on marginally "Elite" players (Joe Johnson ,for instance) that aren't leading them to a title OR taking on guys with red flags (see Cousins, Boogie); 
3. Teams that draft in the lottery seem to make a habit of doing so (evidence suggests true) implying that teams cannot get out of the losing habit once they start;
4. In the last 20 years, every NBA champion has been led to said title by a minimum of 2 lottery picks; usually including one top 5 pick (or more);

The above seems to point to one conclusion:  Winning team / franchises will continue to win while losing franchises will continue to lose.   For IF it holds that you must have elite talent to win titles (history suggests this is true) and IF it holds that Atlanta cannot sign Elite FA or trade for an Elite player (again, history suggests true), THEN the only logical conclusion is that ATL must DRAFT elite talent.  BUT, IF it also holds that tanking breeds losing which cannot be easily corrected, then how exactly does that lead to a title?  

I think the answer is that point 3 is not entirely accurate.  Yes, a lot of teams have tried to tank and have been unsuccessful.  Or at least they haven't proven it a good strategy.  But that's where the other front office stuff comes in.  Do you have a vision / plan for the team? What is its identity?  Are you signing lesser role players that fit that identity?  Do you have a coach that pushes the identity and players that buy in?  All of that stuff matters and can be the difference between getting out of the lottery revolving door and into the fast lane for a title (see Warriors, Golden State).  

No, it's not easy.  No, the Hawks don't have the built in advantage of having a Top 5 player of all time grow up in our back yard or having a history of titles to draw on (LA / Bos / Chi).  No, ATL isn't NY or LA or South Beach with all the glam and no state tax.  And yes, imo, it does mean that the only real viable option for a team like the Hawks is to go the lottery route and hope they have the front office brains to make the right decisions to go along with the drafting.  It takes time and it takes doing it in a smart way.  We'll see if Schlenk has what it takes.   

Some people don't know the History of the Clippers. 

Anyway. 

The thing you miss is developing the culture and having a blueprint.  That's the way that Ferry was going while he was Here.   He had a blueprint and a mode for the type of players he was looking for.  IN a sense. BK the same.  The difference is that Ferry was more willing to build a culture than stick with the mold. Unlike BK.   However, I think if you forget the culture, you fall into losing as your culture regardless of how much talent you get.   Many players are talented but just not winners. 

 

[EazyRoc]

1 hour ago, Diesel said:

Alright EasyRock  Which team had more talent:

2008 Atlanta Hawks

Vs.

2014 Atlanta Hawks

2014 obviously.

[Diesel]

13 minutes ago, AHF said:

You can get elite NBA players without elite talent going back if you have a good stack of lottery picks and/or young players to send back.  Houston got Harden with 2 lottery picks; Boston got KG and Allen with a mix of picks and young players; etc.

This!!

[Vol4ever]

5 hours ago, kg01 said:

I actually agree with this.  However, I don't think 'where we were the last 10 years' was a desirable position either.

At least we made the playoffs.   Like I said, unless we get a superstar player we will be in the same position as before, so therefore nothing has changed.  

[Vol4ever]

44 minutes ago, BrazilianHawk said:

Well we had Danny Ferry and experienced some success for a brief periodof time. Then Gearon Jr. happened.

I know, but the rebuild folks on this board are thinking we will be at championship level next.  If we somehow get a superstar then maybe, but I dont see any on the horizion.   

[KB21]

5 minutes ago, Vol4ever said:

I know, but the rebuild folks on this board are thinking we will be at championship level next.  If we somehow get a superstar then maybe, but I dont see any on the horizion.   

Yep.  Those that support this atrocious strategy believe that the Hawks will be able to just flip a switch when the "talent level is high enough" and start winning championships.

[kg01]

54 minutes ago, BrazilianHawk said:

Well we had Danny Ferry and experienced some success for a brief periodof time. Then Gearon Jr. happened.

That was fool's gold.

[BrazilianHawk]

Just now, kg01 said:

That was fool's gold.

I guess we didn't have the time to find out. I don't think it was, but you might be right, who knows?

[JayBirdHawk]

36 minutes ago, AHF said:

You can get elite NBA players without elite talent going back if you have a good stack of lottery picks and/or young players to send back.  Houston got Harden with 2 lottery picks; Boston got KG and Allen with a mix of picks and young players; etc.

 

23 minutes ago, Diesel said:

This!!

You agreed with AHF, so tell me - how do you get the lottery picks and young players with potential to Trade for the stars? 

Hawks haven't had that in a ahile, now we do. The question will now be - when and if we will be willing to do so and if we should.

[kg01]

4 minutes ago, BrazilianHawk said:

I guess we didn't have the time to find out. I don't think it was, but you might be right, who knows?

I don't think we were drafting in a way that would make that run sustainable.

[BrazilianHawk]

He was better at signing layers than most of the folks out there, but drafting wasn't really his forte. Anyway, a fact is a fact, he built the best Atlanta Hawks team ever, so I was 100% fine with him. I only wish he had shown Larry Drew the door after that draft. We could have had Giannis instead of Dennis.

[KB21]

1 minute ago, BrazilianHawk said:

He was better at signing layers than most of the folks out there, but drafting wasn't really his forte. Anyway, a fact is a fact, he built the best Atlanta Hawks team ever, so I was 100% fine with him. I only wish he had shown Larry Drew the door after that draft. We could have had Giannis instead of Dennis.

Danny would have kept the team competitive by signing players who are undervalued by the market like Paul Millsap and DMC were when the Hawks signed them.  Kent Bazemore was undervalued when Danny signed him, and I highly doubt Danny would have resigned him to that big deal when the time came.  He would have instead found another Kent Bazemore on a more valued contract.

[Peoriabird]

I thought we had a dedicated tank thread???

[nathan2331]

Danny would have kept the team competitive by signing players who are undervalued by the market like Paul Millsap and DMC were when the Hawks signed them.  Kent Bazemore was undervalued when Danny signed him, and I highly doubt Danny would have resigned him to that big deal when the time came.  He would have instead found another Kent Bazemore on a more valued contract.

That probably would've been the case had Ferry stayed on board, but do you think we ever had a chance to beat a LeBron led team? I suppose in the three years the Hawks would've had Ferry, he could've made different moves to actually upgrade the team but we were in a bad position in that we were near the salary cap so we couldn't pay the biggest free agents and we had no assets to bring in a premier player. Players like Kyrie, Cousins and Paul George would've been traded without us being able to make a play.

[KB21]

4 minutes ago, nathan2331 said:

28 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Danny would have kept the team competitive by signing players who are undervalued by the market like Paul Millsap and DMC were when the Hawks signed them.  Kent Bazemore was undervalued when Danny signed him, and I highly doubt Danny would have resigned him to that big deal when the time came.  He would have instead found another Kent Bazemore on a more valued contract.

 

That probably would've been the case had Ferry stayed on board, but do you think we ever had a chance to beat a LeBron led team? I suppose in the three years the Hawks would've had Ferry, he could've made different moves to actually upgrade the team but we were in a bad position in that we were near the salary cap so we couldn't pay the biggest free agents and we had no assets to bring in a premier player. Players like Kyrie, Cousins and Paul George would've been traded without us being able to make a play.

Considering that no team in the Eastern Conference has beaten a LeBron lead team in the playoffs in 8 years, it is unlikely that you would build a team that could do it.  

[kg01]

13 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

I thought we had a dedicated tank thread???

Nah, this is Tanksquawk.com as long as the "doctor" is making his rounds.

[BrazilianHawk]

34 minutes ago, nathan2331 said:

57 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Danny would have kept the team competitive by signing players who are undervalued by the market like Paul Millsap and DMC were when the Hawks signed them.  Kent Bazemore was undervalued when Danny signed him, and I highly doubt Danny would have resigned him to that big deal when the time came.  He would have instead found another Kent Bazemore on a more valued contract.

 

That probably would've been the case had Ferry stayed on board, but do you think we ever had a chance to beat a LeBron led team? I suppose in the three years the Hawks would've had Ferry, he could've made different moves to actually upgrade the team but we were in a bad position in that we were near the salary cap so we couldn't pay the biggest free agents and we had no assets to bring in a premier player. Players like Kyrie, Cousins and Paul George would've been traded without us being able to make a play.

OR

Maybe Danny could have traded the nice players on good contracts for them instead.

[AHF]

1 minute ago, BrazilianHawk said:

OR

Maybe Danny could have traded the nice players on good contracts for them instead.

All of those players were traded for lottery picks and young players taken in the lottery.  None of those teams wanted underpriced vets.

[nathan2331]

All of those players were traded for lottery picks and young players taken in the lottery.  None of those teams wanted underpriced vets.

Which is why we needed to rebuild. Our team wasn't that valuable. We had bunch of Robins with no way of acquiring a Batman. We still don't have a lead guy yet, but there's a chance Young could become that player or maybe we draft him next year.

 

That being said, if we don't hit big on our next pick KB might be right then. The Sixers got lucky drafting Simmons and Embiid and were even more fortunate their injuries didn't set them back. I don't have faith in Schlenk as a GM, so while I think we should've tanked, I don't like the decisions we've made.

[KB21]

39 minutes ago, nathan2331 said:

Which is why we needed to rebuild. Our team wasn't that valuable. We had bunch of Robins with no way of acquiring a Batman. We still don't have a lead guy yet, but there's a chance Young could become that player or maybe we draft him next year.

 

That being said, if we don't hit big on our next pick KB might be right then. The Sixers got lucky drafting Simmons and Embiid and were even more fortunate their injuries didn't set them back. I don't have faith in Schlenk as a GM, so while I think we should've tanked, I don't like the decisions we've made.

There is no might be about it.  I am right.  Tanking will not lead to a championship.  It will lead to a losing culture that will be very difficult to overcome.