Q: Do you believe Pierce is "Schlenk's guy," or do you think Pierce is a bridge to that next head coach? And why?

[sturt]

Just interested in what others are thinking, so I'm not laying out a case either way.

Oh, and... if Pierce is a bridge, any conjecture as to who the "real" guy will be in a couple of years?

[nathan2331]

I think he's Schlenk's guy as far as development goes. I think he trusts Pierce to use his experience in Philadelphia to guide our young people that we'll be drafting in the coming years. Whether or not he's the bridge remains to be seen, I don't think anybody can answer that question right now.

[Jungle Jack]

Brett Brown being allowed security in spite of an overall record that will takes decades (if he has the chance) to overcome really changes the perception or perhaps the narrative.  That is when they dig out, I reckon he will get a shot to see what where he can take them.

[sturt]

5 hours ago, nathan2331 said:

 I don't think anybody can answer that question right now.

Answer definitely, no. But just seeking opinions, and why people might think the way they do.

[JayBirdHawk]

He's Schlenk's guy right now. 

[Peoriabird]

Dumb question

[KB21]

He's a bridge.  He has no chance to win given the situation he has come into.

[sturt]

47 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

He's Schlenk's guy right now. 

Not sure why anyone would be allergic to the term "bridge," but okay, if that's the way you prefer to say it.... hehe.

[kg01]

29 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Dumb question

Oh, be nice.  It's not a dumb question, it's just ridiculously too early to ax it.

There's literally no answer at this point.

[KB21]

Oh, it's an easy answer.  He's an unqualified coach who got this job, and he got it for one reason.  To absorb all the losing this team will do over the next 4 years.

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

Oh, it's an easy answer.  He's an unqualified coach who got this job, and he got it for one reason.  To absorb all the losing this team will do over the next 4 years.

Unqualified huh...I would say something but I'll keep my thoughts to myself

[sturt]

1 hour ago, Jungle Jack said:

Brett Brown being allowed security in spite of an overall record that will takes decades (if he has the chance) to overcome really changes the perception or perhaps the narrative.  That is when they dig out, I reckon he will get a shot to see what where he can take them.

Good thoughts, but I'm not sure that this situation is that situation. There, you had a transparent from-the-top decision to effectively mandate NBA history's most intentional and thorough tank job ever. So, it wouldn't seem to be important to be changing coaches every 3 years or so in the first place under that narrative.

Now, perhaps we're actually implementing a similar thing, and Schlenk just won't admit to that plan in the way that Hinkie did. But so far, his public comments have only indicated that we're taking this draft and next year's draft to try to infuse the roster with top-shelf talent.

And... am I missing something???.... they have "dug out" at this point, no? By virtue of them making the playoffs, I think most would see it that way. And Brown does seem to be getting that shot.

My question effectively tries to get at this... if we seem poised to turn a corner at some point, do you see someone out there that you figure is Schlenk's guy, or even strongly suspect that there is?

 

[KB21]

2 minutes ago, sturt said:

Good thoughts, but I'm not sure that this situation is that situation. There, you had a transparent from-the-top decision to effectively mandate NBA history's most intentional and thorough tank job ever. So, it wouldn't seem to be important to be changing coaches every 3 years or so in the first place under that narrative.

Now, perhaps we're actually implementing a similar thing, and Schlenk just won't admit to that plan in the way that Hinkie did. But so far, his public comments have only indicated that we're taking this draft and next year's draft to try to infuse the roster with top-shelf talent.

And... am I missing something???.... they have "dug out" at this point, no? By virtue of them making the playoffs, I think most would see it that way. And Brown does seem to be getting that shot.

My question effectively tries to get at this... if we seem poised to turn a corner at some point, do you see someone out there that you figure is Schlenk's guy, or even strongly suspect that there is?

 

Schlenk will not be around when the Hawks turn the corner.  Ressler is going to get restless with losing, and he will fire Schlenk.

[sturt]

6 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Oh, it's an easy answer.  He's an unqualified coach who got this job, and he got it for one reason.  To absorb all the losing this team will do over the next 4 years.

You go too far, KB. He's not "unqualified" by any stretch. This hire is very typical of a team in the Hawks phase of evolution. NBA history is littered with them.

I give the guy his due, myself. It did raise an eyebrow to see former players of his, not on the Hawks roster, show up at the presser to support him. And I get it that people want to give him a chance, and that's fair enough... he is as deserving of a chance as anyone, and as a Hawks fan, I'd love to see this be one of those out-of-the-blue successful hires in the tradition of Popovich or D'Antoni, both of whom were not especially universally appreciated before being given their first NBA HC gig.

[sturt]

2 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Schlenk will not be around when the Hawks turn the corner.  Ressler is going to get restless with losing, and he will fire Schlenk.

I'm not convinced that Ressler isn't himself driving the tank thing. And for that reason, I'm not convinced that Schlenk has any such short leash here.

[KB21]

2 minutes ago, sturt said:

I'm not convinced that Ressler isn't himself driving the tank thing. And for that reason, I'm not convinced that Schlenk has any such short leash here.

Ressler doesn't know enough about basketball to make a decision like this.  He was convinced into doing this.  He was fully on board with keeping Paul Millsap at the end of last season.  

[sturt]

5 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Ressler doesn't know enough about basketball to make a decision like this.  He was convinced into doing this.  He was fully on board with keeping Paul Millsap at the end of last season.  

So, in your way of thinking, owners who don't know enough about basketball never make a decision like this?... hehe... now c'mon.... owners are more often full of themselves than they aren't... particularly after they've had a few seasons to gain some confidence in their own perspectives.

And... it's an aside... but I'm scratching my head on your conclusion that he was fully on board with keeping Sap.

I read that very differently, as-in, Bud eventually adamantly stuck his PoBO job on the line with that decision b/c Wilcox was just as adamant that a trade needed to be made... and when it didn't go so well after all, at the end of the season, Ressler removed PoBO from Bud's job title as a result of the showdown.

Regardless, the narrative that makes the most sense to me is that Ressler is very involved with these decisions. I believe when Bud's determination to keep Sap was proven a bad idea, and then Ressler removed the PoBO title from Bud, and then when Bud was evidently left out of the GM search process, and then when some tank-team coach was winning games at the end of the season and some tank-team owner was reportedly upset about it.... I just think the relationship between Bud and Ressler had eroded to almost nothing, and it was, in reality, Ressler who ultimately chose to make a "mutual decision" between Schlenk and Bud necessary.

 

[fitforlifedee1]

So, in your way of thinking, owners who don't know enough about basketball never make a decision like this?... hehe... now c'mon.... owners are more often full of themselves than they aren't... particularly after they've had a few seasons to gain some confidence in their own perspectives.

 

And... it's an aside... but I'm scratching my head on your conclusion that he was fully on board with keeping Sap.

I read that very differently, as-in, Bud eventually adamantly stuck his PoBO job on the line with that decision b/c Wilcox was just as adamant that a trade needed to be made... and when it didn't go so well after all, at the end of the season, Ressler removed PoBO from Bud's job title as a result of the showdown.

Regardless, the narrative that makes the most sense to me is that Ressler is very involved with these decisions. I believe when Bud's determination to keep Sap was proven a bad idea, and then Ressler removed the PoBO title from Bud, and then when Bud was evidently left out of the GM search process, and then when some tank-team coach was winning games at the end of the season and some tank-team owner was reportedly upset about it.... I just think the relationship between Bud and Ressler had eroded to almost nothing, and it was, in reality, Ressler who ultimately chose to make a "mutual decision" between Schlenk and Bud necessary.

 

Wow I like this post!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JTB]

1 hour ago, sturt said:

So, in your way of thinking, owners who don't know enough about basketball never make a decision like this?... hehe... now c'mon.... owners are more often full of themselves than they aren't... particularly after they've had a few seasons to gain some confidence in their own perspectives.

And... it's an aside... but I'm scratching my head on your conclusion that he was fully on board with keeping Sap.

I read that very differently, as-in, Bud eventually adamantly stuck his PoBO job on the line with that decision b/c Wilcox was just as adamant that a trade needed to be made... and when it didn't go so well after all, at the end of the season, Ressler removed PoBO from Bud's job title as a result of the showdown.

Regardless, the narrative that makes the most sense to me is that Ressler is very involved with these decisions. I believe when Bud's determination to keep Sap was proven a bad idea, and then Ressler removed the PoBO title from Bud, and then when Bud was evidently left out of the GM search process, and then when some tank-team coach was winning games at the end of the season and some tank-team owner was reportedly upset about it.... I just think the relationship between Bud and Ressler had eroded to almost nothing, and it was, in reality, Ressler who ultimately chose to make a "mutual decision" between Schlenk and Bud necessary.

 

Yup I believe this...ressler should get more finger pointing than schlenk but this board won’t see it that way. He knew schlenk would suggest tanking before he hired him.

[sturt]

8 minutes ago, JTB said:

He knew schlenk would suggest tanking before he hired him.

It makes sense to me that it was an option that Ressler was very much open to, and that Schlenk was more than happy to put forward during the interview phase since, really, selling the GSW template was his best shot at getting the ATL job.

But at that stage, I think Ressler still held out hope that he could successfully hire a new GM and that the new GM and Bud would be able to forge enough chemistry and commonality of philosophy that there would be the best of both GSW and SAS worlds.

Nice dream, anyway.

===========================================

Back to the OP...

I know I said I wanted to hear others' opinions on who Schlenk's guy is and that I'd sit on the sidelines, but I'll go ahead after all...

I pick "c"....

I don't think Schlenk has a guy.

No one with whom he's been associated in all his years in GSW and MIA really seems to me to be a natural target for when ATL gets good again. I think if Pierce ends up being a bridge, it will be a matter of who are the hottest names on the market who have some degree of proven success. Not thrilled with that conclusion, but it seems most reasonable.

But here's a dark horse name that could conceivably surface if, in a year or two, a certain former college coach leads his team to the NBA finals: Gregg Marshall.