SO....MANY....DOUBTERS

[AtLaS]

6 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

+1000.

Who cares if we didn't get rid of Baze.  It's not like we are winning in the next 2 years anyway. 

We got the guy they wanted.  Ultimately it's going to come down to Doncic vs Trae, if Trae performs noone will care about any of this.

[JayBirdHawk]

8 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

Who cares if we didn't get rid of Baze.  It's not like we are winning in the next 2 years anyway. 

We got the guy they wanted.  Ultimately it's going to come down to Doncic vs Trae, if Trae performs noone will care about any of this.

It matters, because it speaks to Schlenks negotiating skills or lack thereof.

[AHF]

16 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

Who cares if we didn't get rid of Baze.  It's not like we are winning in the next 2 years anyway. 

We got the guy they wanted.  Ultimately it's going to come down to Doncic vs Trae, if Trae performs noone will care about any of this.

 

7 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

It matters, because it speaks to Schlenks negotiating skills or lack thereof.

Agree with Jay that it reflects on how well Schlenk did maximizing his leverage (which was considerable, IMO).  That said, I am infinitely happier we got the pick even with the protections than with us doing a salary of dump with Baze.  That cap space is not tremendously valuable in 2018-19.

[EazyRoc]

Why would we want to get rid of Baze anyways ? He’s our veteran leader and a solid 3 and D guy. Having him on the roster (and other vets) will shorten the ugly period too and give us quality players as our young talent comes into their own. Who cares about salary ? We aren’t signing LeBron and by the time we are attractive enough to start talking Free Agents, Baze will be a Free Agent.

[AtLaS]

35 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

It matters, because it speaks to Schlenks negotiating skills or lack thereof.

Pure speculation.  How do you know that Dallas would've still done the deal?

[AtLaS]

I mean, is it really worth risking blowing up the entire deal over a Baze contract that doesn't matter?  Not really.  It's really just more like, screw it it's not worth even negotiating over.  We get the guy we want + a first.  Baze is irrelevant.

[Flight]

Yeah if anything I'm glad we didn't dump Baze, he's really the best locker room veteran we have. That's just important to have around a franchise that's rebuilding anyways.

[drzachary]

Pure speculation.  How do you know that Dallas would've still done the deal?

 

It’s certainly a possibility that Dallas wasn’t as high on Luka as some think. (Clearly, two teams before us also didn’t see him as the best prospect of all time.) Some prices are just too high.

[AHF]

19 minutes ago, drzachary said:

 

It’s certainly a possibility that Dallas wasn’t as high on Luka as some think. (Clearly, two teams before us also didn’t see him as the best prospect of all time.) Some prices are just too high.

But not too high when trading for the 10th pick.  (In a better upcoming draft class).

[drzachary]

But not too high when trading for the 10th pick.  (In a better upcoming draft class).

Depends on how you evaluate the players that also changed hands. They traded a 16th (?) and a future unprotected for a 10, vs a 5 and a future protected for a 3. *shrug*

 

For all we know (and I wanted Luka!) this was the best deal we could get. Better to evaluate our GM on the return from the deal we got rather than evaluate a fantasy deal that may not have ever been possible.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AHF]

11 minutes ago, drzachary said:

Depends on how you evaluate the players that also changed hands. They traded a 16th (?) and a future unprotected for a 10, vs a 5 and a future protected for a 3. *shrug*

 

For all we know (and I wanted Luka!) this was the best deal we could get. Better to evaluate our GM on the return from the deal we got rather than evaluate a fantasy deal that may not have ever been possible.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe that was the best deal we could have gotten for Dwight - more future money and a worse draft pick.

Maybe that was the best deal we could have cut with Bud - give him every penny under contract and give him total freedom to interview and sign elsewhere prior to the draft even though he couldn't coach anywhere unless we released him.

Maybe that was the best trade we could have made with Dallas even though the 10th pick got more and the Celtics got more more attractive picks in two different deals (Brk & Phi) and Kyrie Irving was drafted on an unprotected pick with a salary dump and Damon Lillard was drafted on an unprotected pick acquired in exchange for the walking corpse of Gerald Wallace....but for us maybe this was the best we could get.  And in fairness it might have been.

But we can't evaluate anything here by that standard.  From where I sit, I see a pattern of weak negotiating.

[drzachary]

38 minutes ago, AHF said:

Maybe that was the best deal we could have gotten for Dwight - more future money and a worse draft pick.

Maybe that was the best deal we could have cut with Bud - give him every penny under contract and give him total freedom to interview and sign elsewhere prior to the draft even though he couldn't coach anywhere unless we released him.

Maybe that was the best trade we could have made with Dallas even though the 10th pick got more and the Celtics got more more attractive picks in two different deals (Brk & Phi) and Kyrie Irving was drafted on an unprotected pick with a salary dump and Damon Lillard was drafted on an unprotected pick acquired in exchange for the walking corpse of Gerald Wallace....but for us maybe this was the best we could get.  And in fairness it might have been.

But we can't evaluate anything here by that standard.  From where I sit, I see a pattern of weak negotiating.

You are right.  You really did put it in perspective!  You make great points, and I concede that I was putting too much faith in an illusory "best deal" and not enough weighing the less than stellar crap he's already done.

I was wrong there!

 

 

[AHF]

10 minutes ago, drzachary said:

You are right.  You really did put it in perspective!  You make great points, and I concede that I was putting too much faith in an illusory "best deal" and not enough weighing the less than stellar crap he's already done.

I was wrong there!

 

 

The point you made was fair.  We don't know for sure what "would" have happened had Atlanta tightened the screws harder or what was offered (other than the deal that got made).  I just see a pattern with Schlenk, look at Doncic and how bad the Mavs wanted him, and speculate that we could have done better with Ainge or someone who is a more aggressive negotiator going at it.

Frankly, the way we let Bud go made me absolutely crazy with Schlenk because that was a situation where we held every single card and did not use an ounce of that leverage to offset the future amounts he stands to collect.

[AtLaS]

42 minutes ago, AHF said:

Maybe that was the best deal we could have gotten for Dwight - more future money and a worse draft pick.

Maybe that was the best deal we could have cut with Bud - give him every penny under contract and give him total freedom to interview and sign elsewhere prior to the draft even though he couldn't coach anywhere unless we released him.

Maybe that was the best trade we could have made with Dallas even though the 10th pick got more and the Celtics got more more attractive picks in two different deals (Brk & Phi) and Kyrie Irving was drafted on an unprotected pick with a salary dump and Damon Lillard was drafted on an unprotected pick acquired in exchange for the walking corpse of Gerald Wallace....but for us maybe this was the best we could get.  And in fairness it might have been.

But we can't evaluate anything here by that standard.  From where I sit, I see a pattern of weak negotiating.

The Bud release doesn't hurt us.  He didn't want to be here through a rebuild, and the new management team wanted their own coach.  Doesn't affect our salary cap and he did a lot of great things for us, maybe they didn't want to hold him hostage.

I was originally upset about the Dwight trade also.  But, he didn't fetch much more for Charlotte a year later as an expiring contract after a better season than he had with us.  It's pretty obvious teams just don't want him.

I don't see how not having Baze included changes the deal at all if we got the guy we wanted.  Now, you can totally disagree in their opinion that Trae should not have been ranked higher on their board.  But if they believe Trae is the guy, they got him and added a 1st.  That may have been the only deal on the table, Memphis wasn't offering anything better (or we would have taken that deal) and Orlando was highly rumored to take Trae.  Dallas was our only option, and they knew it.  We were also their only option for Doncic.

This trade will be based on how the player performs, not some arbitrary assumption that we may or may not have been able to shed a contract in another rebuilding year.  If we kept Doncic, and walked away from the deal over an irrelevant Baze contract, and Trae turned out to be a better player it would be much worse since that is who we actually preferred PLUS missing out on an additional 1st.

 

[AHF]

1 minute ago, AtLaS said:

The Bud release doesn't hurt us.  He didn't want to be here through a rebuild, and the new management team wanted their own coach.  Doesn't affect our salary cap and he did a lot of great things for us, maybe they didn't want to hold him hostage.

I was originally upset about the Dwight trade also.  But, he didn't fetch much more for Charlotte a year later as an expiring contract after a better season than he had with us.  It's pretty obvious teams just don't want him.

I don't see how not having Baze included changes the deal at all if we got the guy we wanted.  Now, you can totally disagree in their opinion that Trae should not have been ranked higher on their board.  But if they believe Trae is the guy, they got him and added a 1st.  That may have been the only deal on the table, Memphis wasn't offering anything better (or we would have taken that deal) and Orlando was highly rumored to take Trae.  Dallas was our only option, and they knew it.  We were also their only option for Doncic.

This trade will be based on how the player performs, not some arbitrary assumption that we may or may not have been able to shed a contract in another rebuilding year.  If we kept Doncic, and walked away from the deal over an irrelevant Baze contract, and Trae turned out to be a better player it would be much worse since that is who we actually preferred PLUS missing out on an additional 1st.

 

Not sure why you are bringing up Baze here.  My issue was with the protection on the pick (only they get protection and they get it for 4 years).

For Bud, he should have given up some of his future salary to walk away from the team.  It sets a bad precedent when a coach says, "I want to coach somewhere else and I want you to pay me $13M to do it."  And the response is then "Sounds reasonable to me.  Where do I send the checks?"  So, so weak.

[JayBirdHawk]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

Not sure why you are bringing up Baze here.  My issue was with the protection on the pick (only they get protection and they get it for 4 years).

For Bud, he should have given up some of his future salary to walk away from the team.  It sets a bad precedent when a coach says, "I want to coach somewhere else and I want you to pay me $13M to do it."  And the response is then "Sounds reasonable to me.  Where do I send the checks?"  So, so weak.

Exactly, I'm not sure why it's hard to understand when operating from a position of strength and it appears you get the short end, it leaves you with question marks - in both this trade and the Bud negotiation.

That's the gist.

[AtLaS]

1 hour ago, AHF said:

Not sure why you are bringing up Baze here.  My issue was with the protection on the pick (only they get protection and they get it for 4 years).

For Bud, he should have given up some of his future salary to walk away from the team.  It sets a bad precedent when a coach says, "I want to coach somewhere else and I want you to pay me $13M to do it."  And the response is then "Sounds reasonable to me.  Where do I send the checks?"  So, so weak.

My fault on Baze, many others were saying that, not you specifically.

But, Dallas could have walked over that protection.  And we were very high on Trae Young.  If we play hardball and they back out of the deal, we are stuck with the lesser of the prospects (according to Hawks brass) and no extra 1st round pick.  I know lots of fans wanted Doncic, but Hawks upper management was higher on Young.

If we keep Doncic and Young turns out to be better (as Hawks management seems to believe) and we look back at how we balked because of protection and stubbornness they would get blasted.  

All that said, I would have liked to have gotten lesser protection also.  But we don't know that Dallas would've obliged.  

 

Regarding Bud, it sounds like Hawks management was pretty confident he would get hired by another team which is why they agreed to the deal.  It was risky, but now that he's been hired that will eat a lot of what we owe him so it actually worked out pretty well for us.

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2018/04/27/report-mike-budenholzer-guaranteed-the-13-million-remaining-on-his-hawks-contract/

 

 

[Devon]

21 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

Actually Spellman had a better shooting percentage from 3 than both of them.  Think about it for a second...If you can spread the floor with shooters then there is more spacing which makes the game easier to play of offense.  This effectively eliminates the defensive center with limited offensive skill like JJJ or Bamba.  Today's NBA is perfect for a center like Spellman, a big man that can not only shoot but can move in space and has long arms to defend.  The rest of the NBA just hasn't caught on yet but the will once they realize how they did not scout players correctly like Spellman.  That Dude should not have had a 2nd round grade on him period!  I don't know what Scouts didn't see in Huerter!  And Trae young has unlimited range and has pure point guard instincts with the ability to pass with either hand.  We hadn't seen anything like him in the past.

you had me until you said JJJ was limited offensively... He literally IS a "stretch 4 Shooting Big" in a 5's body.

That dude has offensive and defensive upside, as well as a decent 3-ball, but he's a Memphis Grizzlies player so...

[AHF]

13 hours ago, AtLaS said:

Regarding Bud, it sounds like Hawks management was pretty confident he would get hired by another team which is why they agreed to the deal.  It was risky, but now that he's been hired that will eat a lot of what we owe him so it actually worked out pretty well for us.

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2018/04/27/report-mike-budenholzer-guaranteed-the-13-million-remaining-on-his-hawks-contract/

 

 

That makes literally no sense.  You could have taken money off the table 100% before you start reducing the remainder with offset of other salary.  For example, if he was due $6.5M per year then conceding half of that leaves you owing him $3.25M per season and the new contract he signs further reduces via offset so there is no conceivable circumstance where you aren't better protected financially by getting him to take a haircut in exchange for being allowed to walk.

Moreover, you could have put other conditions on his departure.  A common one is a non-solicitation provision where he will not solicit people employed by the Hawks.  That would keep him from poaching our staff and coaches unless we agree to it in advance.

There were just so many easy gets here and it isn't even like we would be unreasonable to ask for them.  Bud literally is getting paid 100% of his salary to coach elsewhere when we could have him working in a film room.  We gave him an incredibly big concession by letting him walk and got zero in return.

[bleachkit]

21 hours ago, AHF said:

The point you made was fair.  We don't know for sure what "would" have happened had Atlanta tightened the screws harder or what was offered (other than the deal that got made).  I just see a pattern with Schlenk, look at Doncic and how bad the Mavs wanted him, and speculate that we could have done better with Ainge or someone who is a more aggressive negotiator going at it.

Frankly, the way we let Bud go made me absolutely crazy with Schlenk because that was a situation where we held every single card and did not use an ounce of that leverage to offset the future amounts he stands to collect.

Bud had an off set in his contract, or am I mistaken?