The Tank Thread

[Buzzard]

4 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Of those teams, only OKC tanked their roster out.

You are funny. The only thing we did was let an aging Millsap walk for 30 million a year. Horford tanked us out on his own.

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

You are funny. The only thing we did was let an aging Millsap walk for 30 million a year. Horford tanked us out on his own.

Nope. 

There are 26 win shares that were on last year's team that are no longer here.  The team won 43 games last year.  Subtract those 26 win shares, and you get 17 wins.  This team is on pace for 19 wins.  

[Buzzard]

Just now, KB21 said:

Nope. 

There are 26 win shares that were on last year's team that are no longer here.  The team won 43 games last year.  Subtract those 26 win shares, and you get 17 wins.  This team is on pace for 19 wins.  

I showed you great history of what HOF free agents are attracted to and I showed you the great draft history of past champions. The best you can do is propose 43 wins and a aging star is going to do what? Win 40 this year and 36 the next?

If we don't draft a HOF player then we obviously have to sign one. Or do you propose we can win a championship without one? I don't get you at all. Two years ago I thought we had a solid team that was attractive for free agents and as a possible trade destination. The following year with Horford gone, I was convinced otherwise.

[KB21]

15 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

I showed you great history of what HOF free agents are attracted to and I showed you the great draft history of past champions. The best you can do is propose 43 wins and a aging star is going to do what? Win 40 this year and 36 the next?

If we don't draft a HOF player then we obviously have to sign one. Or do you propose we can win a championship without one? I don't get you at all. Two years ago I thought we had a solid team that was attractive for free agents and as a possible trade destination. The following year with Horford gone, I was convinced otherwise.

Why is it so difficult to get it?

The hardest thing to do in sports is to become good when you are very bad.  The Hawks chose to become very bad, therefore making that next step they take the most difficult.  We have fans on this very board that truly believe this next step is going to be simple to make.  All it takes is drafting a generational talent and then poof, you are a championship contender.

No.  It takes a lot more than that, particularly to start from where the Hawks are at.  This team is an expansion level team right now.  There are only one or two players on this entire roster that I feel MAY be contributors on a winning team going forward.  So, this team is having to build completely from scratch.  The foundation is not there.

This entire approach also ignores the very real probability that there is not a generational talent to be drafted, period.  So, if there is not a generational talent available, then the team has tanked their roster and team out for absolutely no reason.

But hey, let's cling to this false hope that the foundation is in place, and that all we need is a generational talent to be back in the playoffs within 2 years.

This is a massive rebuild.

[KB21]

The bottom line is this.  Bad teams tend to stay bad.  Good teams tend to stay good.  Over time, everyone regressions toward the .500 level.  That's not the result of any particular strategy.  It's the result of regressing to the mean.  

[High5]

The last time we "bottomed out" and won 13 games it only took us 3 seasons to start our 10-year playoff run. We started from a worse position and we had BK and Woody running the show. So that's very encouraging! 

[Buzzard]

27 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Why is it so difficult to get it?

The hardest thing to do in sports is to become good when you are very bad.  The Hawks chose to become very bad, therefore making that next step they take the most difficult.  We have fans on this very board that truly believe this next step is going to be simple to make.  All it takes is drafting a generational talent and then poof, you are a championship contender.

No.  It takes a lot more than that, particularly to start from where the Hawks are at.  This team is an expansion level team right now.  There are only one or two players on this entire roster that I feel MAY be contributors on a winning team going forward.  So, this team is having to build completely from scratch.  The foundation is not there.

This entire approach also ignores the very real probability that there is not a generational talent to be drafted, period.  So, if there is not a generational talent available, then the team has tanked their roster and team out for absolutely no reason.

But hey, let's cling to this false hope that the foundation is in place, and that all we need is a generational talent to be back in the playoffs within 2 years.

This is a massive rebuild.

That is all your opinion KB. Nothing more and nothing less.  We are one player or pick away from pushing for the playoffs again. Give us Millsap or someone of his caliber and we are pushing for the playoffs in the East. I do want more though. I want that HOF Player and 43 wins to be the start, not the end, of something good.

And yes, that is my opinion. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

Edited December 14, 2017 by Buzzard

[Lurker]

The missing piece here is it's a whole lot harder, especially not in NFL and MLB land to go from merely good from legitimately championship caliber. 

As much as we may love that team, the 14/15 Hawks was not championship caliber if you merely take one player away, and that was Thabo Sefolosha. The defense got exposed without him. You can indeed make an argument however that the 14/15 Hawks while 100% healthy were actually championship caliber however, but to me, honestly it was barely. It would have been a good series but likely still a loss to a hypothetically healthy Cleveland.

You can't play that game. That's living on the edge, big time.

[nathan2331]

2 hours ago, KB21 said:

Why is it so difficult to get it?

The hardest thing to do in sports is to become good when you are very bad.  The Hawks chose to become very bad, therefore making that next step they take the most difficult.  We have fans on this very board that truly believe this next step is going to be simple to make.  All it takes is drafting a generational talent and then poof, you are a championship contender.

No.  It takes a lot more than that, particularly to start from where the Hawks are at.  This team is an expansion level team right now.  There are only one or two players on this entire roster that I feel MAY be contributors on a winning team going forward.  So, this team is having to build completely from scratch.  The foundation is not there.

This entire approach also ignores the very real probability that there is not a generational talent to be drafted, period.  So, if there is not a generational talent available, then the team has tanked their roster and team out for absolutely no reason.

But hey, let's cling to this false hope that the foundation is in place, and that all we need is a generational talent to be back in the playoffs within 2 years.

This is a massive rebuild.

I think I've found the disconnect. You think we have 1 or 2 contributors on future contender, I'd argue we've got about 5-6 pieces to the puzzle.

 

If I'm projecting how they'll look in 2-3 years:

 

Dennis-Prince-Collins for me will be 3 quality starters on a good team. Bazemore I think off the bench is a really good option. As a starter and the second-best playmaker on the court he doesn't look great. Bembry is hard to predict until he gets his jump shot together but he might be a contributor. Bellinelli and Ilyasova I don't count on being Hawks for that much longer, but Dedmon by the looks of things should be a very quality backup if we can retain him. Babbitt and Cavanaugh both give us a nice Stretch 4 to choose from, though I imagine we could find a better option in the draft or free agency. Isaiah Taylor has the makings a nice back-up PG, and we have some bigger guards that can play there as well.

 

So from there we need a bona fide SG and C (or PF depending on how you view Collins) as well as other quality bench options. There are a few guys from the 2013-2014 draft classes about to be free agents we can target this year. This off season, Zach LaVine, Rodney Hood and Jabari Parker are restricted free agents this off-season. They are talented, injury-stricken players that have all-star level potential and could possibly be gotten for the right dollar amount if their respective teams don't match.

 

So say we max out LaVine, since the Bulls didn't extend him and they don't match. We could draft Ayton and have a starting lineup of:

 

Schröder/LaVine/Prince/Collins/Ayton - That's a lineup that could get you 80 points a night easy. Ayton's defense is trash, but he has the tools to be dominant on offense and defense if he applied himself properly instead of acting like he's Ryan Anderson . If not Ayton, Mo Bamba is another C who would fit right in.

 

The bench then could look like:

Taylor/Bazemore/Bembry/Cavanaugh or Babbit/Dedmon and we could still buy low on a couple other guys like Mario Hezonja or Jahllil Okafor or Alex Len who offer different skill sets.

 

Not to mention, we still have two other picks who could produce another player we can utilize. Now, objectively I think the team I named is 3rd best in the East easily and we only made one signing. Admittedly LaVine may not available and I don't see the Hawks being able to get a Paul George or DeMarcus Cousins or Klay Thompson in 2019 who would really change our fortunes, but we're not hopeless either. The draft will net us a good player Day 1, whether he becomes generational we'll have to wait and see. But I'd like to know what y'all think of this plan.

[KB21]

Maxing out LaVine?

I almost spit my egg nog onto my computer, because that's just hilarious.  Maxing out a player that isn't even good, but we don't want to give a 2 year deal to Paul Millsap.

[KB21]

Dennis Schröder is not a starter on a good team.  His defense is nonexistent, and he's not efficient enough on offense to off set his lack of defense.  He's in year 5 now, and he is what he is.  So, no.  I don't believe he is a piece of the foundation.  

Taurean Prince has some quick twitch athleticism and some defensive potential.  There have been times his effort has waned defensively this year, and he's been asked to do more than he should be doing offensively.  If his handle ever gets to the point that it is just average, he can be a 3&D plus guy.  If not, then he may just be a rotational player in the long run.

DeAndre Bembry looks to be nothing more than a rotational player long term.  That's not a foundation piece.

John Collins has the upside to be a part of the foundation, and the key going forward is to figure out what he can do.  Can he expand his game to beyond the three point line and become a stretch four who is super athletic?  Will he ever become a good enough defender to truly be a winning player on a good team?  These are questions that will have to be answered over the next 2-3 years as he develops.  

[AHF]

I'm not a fan of a big investment in Lavine either.  Too flawed to even think about maxing.

[Diesel]

2 hours ago, nathan2331 said:

I think I've found the disconnect. You think we have 1 or 2 contributors on future contender, I'd argue we've got about 5-6 pieces to the puzzle.

 

If I'm projecting how they'll look in 2-3 years:

 

Dennis-Prince-Collins for me will be 3 quality starters on a good team. Bazemore I think off the bench is a really good option. As a starter and the second-best playmaker on the court he doesn't look great. Bembry is hard to predict until he gets his jump shot together but he might be a contributor. Bellinelli and Ilyasova I don't count on being Hawks for that much longer, but Dedmon by the looks of things should be a very quality backup if we can retain him. Babbitt and Cavanaugh both give us a nice Stretch 4 to choose from, though I imagine we could find a better option in the draft or free agency. Isaiah Taylor has the makings a nice back-up PG, and we have some bigger guards that can play there as well.

 

So from there we need a bona fide SG and C (or PF depending on how you view Collins) as well as other quality bench options. There are a few guys from the 2013-2014 draft classes about to be free agents we can target this year. This off season, Zach LaVine, Rodney Hood and Jabari Parker are restricted free agents this off-season. They are talented, injury-stricken players that have all-star level potential and could possibly be gotten for the right dollar amount if their respective teams don't match.

 

So say we max out LaVine, since the Bulls didn't extend him and they don't match. We could draft Ayton and have a starting lineup of:

 

Schröder/LaVine/Prince/Collins/Ayton - That's a lineup that could get you 80 points a night easy. Ayton's defense is trash, but he has the tools to be dominant on offense and defense if he applied himself properly instead of acting like he's Ryan Anderson . If not Ayton, Mo Bamba is another C who would fit right in.

 

The bench then could look like:

Taylor/Bazemore/Bembry/Cavanaugh or Babbit/Dedmon and we could still buy low on a couple other guys like Mario Hezonja or Jahllil Okafor or Alex Len who offer different skill sets.

 

Not to mention, we still have two other picks who could produce another player we can utilize. Now, objectively I think the team I named is 3rd best in the East easily and we only made one signing. Admittedly LaVine may not available and I don't see the Hawks being able to get a Paul George or DeMarcus Cousins or Klay Thompson in 2019 who would really change our fortunes, but we're not hopeless either. The draft will net us a good player Day 1, whether he becomes generational we'll have to wait and see. But I'd like to know what y'all think of this plan.

you rightly determined the place where there's a disconnect.  You say 5 players on a future team??  Right now, all of our players are tradable.  That means that none of them are guaranteed a future spot.   It's like Josh Childress, Shelden, and Acie...  We drafted them, but there was no future for them here. 

 

[Diesel]

I think the thing to note is that Bud may not even be the coach 2 years from now.  If that be the case, a guy like Prince may be gone... just because of fit. 

[nathan2331]

I'm not a fan of a big investment in Lavine either.  Too flawed to even think about maxing.

He's a trash defender, but I'd question the coaching in Minnesota. Both Wiggins and Towns have also played poor defense so far in their careers, and you'd expect both of them to be plus defenders. LaVine had most of his struggles at PG offensively, but he's great shooter of the ball, and he's relatively efficient scoring otherwise. Of course the ACL injury he suffered is a bad sign, but he'll be back this season and we'll get the chance to see how he's recovered. I said max him out only because that's the only way I realistically see the Bulls not matching.

 

Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk

 

 

[nathan2331]

you rightly determined the place where there's a disconnect.  You say 5 players on a future team??  Right now, all of our players are tradable.  That means that none of them are guaranteed a future spot.   It's like Josh Childress, Shelden, and Acie...  We drafted them, but there was no future for them here. 

 

They are tradeable, but that doesn't mean they aren't useful. You need good role players as well to win championships and they aren't easy to get. Look at the Thunder who couldn't put the right guys next to Durant and Westbrook.

 

Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk

 

 

[nathan2331]

 

 

Maxing out LaVine?

I almost spit my egg nog onto my computer, because that's just hilarious.  Maxing out a player that isn't even good, but we don't want to give a 2 year deal to Paul Millsap.

 

You give LaVine a max deal or whatever it'll take for the Bulls not to match because he's a restricted free agent and you expect him to improve. He can score the ball very well even if he can't defend a broom. Millsap can walk because he's not going to win us a championship.

 

Dennis Schröder is not a starter on a good team.  His defense is nonexistent, and he's not efficient enough on offense to off set his lack of defense.  He's in year 5 now, and he is what he is.  So, no.  I don't believe he is a piece of the foundation.  

Taurean Prince has some quick twitch athleticism and some defensive potential.  There have been times his effort has waned defensively this year, and he's been asked to do more than he should be doing offensively.  If his handle ever gets to the point that it is just average, he can be a 3&D plus guy.  If not, then he may just be a rotational player in the long run.

DeAndre Bembry looks to be nothing more than a rotational player long term.  That's not a foundation piece.

John Collins has the upside to be a part of the foundation, and the key going forward is to figure out what he can do.  Can he expand his game to beyond the three point line and become a stretch four who is super athletic?  Will he ever become a good enough defender to truly be a winning player on a good team?  These are questions that will have to be answered over the next 2-3 years as he develops.  

 

What PGs are good on defense? Like really? One good screen and a switch is forced. Irving isn't a good defender, Walker, Thomas, Curry aren't great but no one calls for their head. Dennis is worse than those some of those guys but he's a good offensive player. Not elite, but pretty good. If he gets his 3 point shot together his efficiency will skyrocket. That's what's holding him back.

 

Everything else you haven't refuted, we will have to wait and see. Hopefully they develop positively. What I am saying though is that we're not far off.

 

Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk

 

 

[AHF]

Lavine just isn't good enough to max.    It would be like maxing THJr.

[KB21]

5 minutes ago, AHF said:

Lavine just isn't good enough to max.    It would be like maxing THJr.

You didn't even have to add to max.  Lavine just isn't good.  

[nathan2331]

 

 

Lavine just isn't good enough to max.    It would be like maxing THJr.

 

I disagree wholeheartedly. Hardaway is shooting 32% from 3 this season. LaVine shot 39% last season and is a more efficient scoring. The defense I imagine would be similar. LaVine is pretty streaky himself, but he's an asset more than a liability all things considered. Good SGs are hard to find. If we don't draft Doncic I think we have to take a chance on a guy like LaVine or Hood, and hope we can improve their deficiencies.

 

Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk