Trae Young - The Man, The Viper, and The Prosecution aka The MVP aka Ice Trae

[macdaddy]

My issue wasn't with Trae over the summer it was with the front office putting him in that situation.  I had no doubt if he did come back he'd be a class act like always.   To me there is no denying that he went full on Hawks agnostic over the summer in the event they traded him.   Which was total crappiness by the org in my opinion.  

[JeffS17]

30 minutes ago, kg01 said:

My main beef is the boldest.  Why shld we accept this as fact?

You don't have to accept anything(?) I thought i was very clear I'm speculating based on the evidence we have as fans.  I think everyone is entitled to whatever interpretation they want!

[Final_quest]

Something feels off with Trae.  It is speculation, and I agree that fans aren’t mad at him or pointing the finger at him.  He is a person that got stuck in a roster crunch.  Virtually untradeable starting front court, no money, and limited draft capital.

I hope the team gels and he recommits to the Hawks 100%.  The organization probably said no to adding the likes of Ingram and Lavine to appease Trae.  

At least they could salvage our situation by trading Trae and having two 2025 picks. No tanking in 2026 and 2027 just means the team can legitimately try to win games with a young core and a couple vets.  

Thank god we didn’t draft Sarr.  Dyson, Jalen, Risacher, and Okongwu with 2025 picks, and whatever we get for Bogi and Trae is the no tank rebuild option.  

[Wretch]

2 hours ago, JeffS17 said:

I think it's all fair.  There's been a significant amount of smoke on him possibly being moved, and if I put my speculation hat on (everyone's favorite), he probably requested a trade or at least for the Hawks to canvas teams after we communicated we were not intending to trade the #1 pick, and the reports are true that there was no possible deal to be made.  Many reporters have said that teams are not interested in Trae which to me indicates we were asking around... and importantly, there's now been a lot of time that has passed since then and Trae has likely reset his own mindset and expectations for going forward.  

So why I do think he was a bit salty around the time of the draft and that likely was why there was no peep from him publicly on our pick, I view this as very positive because it seems like he is now focused on the future in Atlanta and is investing his own time in our young guys and the squad overall.

38 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

Something feels off with Trae.  It is speculation, and I agree that fans aren’t mad at him or pointing the finger at him.  He is a person that got stuck in a roster crunch.  Virtually untradeable starting front court, no money, and limited draft capital.

I hope the team gels and he recommits to the Hawks 100%.  The organization probably said no to adding the likes of Ingram and Lavine to appease Trae.  

At least they could salvage our situation by trading Trae and having two 2025 picks. No tanking in 2026 and 2027 just means the team can legitimately try to win games with a young core and a couple vets.  

Thank god we didn’t draft Sarr.  Dyson, Jalen, Risacher, and Okongwu with 2025 picks, and whatever we get for Bogi and Trae is the no tank rebuild option.  

All of this is had my mind swirling over the summer...and yes, something feels/felt off to me too.  Not just with Trae either.  I can't put my finger on it, and maybe it's just all of the questions I have about the roster, but something has just felt off about this whole offseason.

The start of the season can't get here soon enough.  I am too anxious to see how this team comes together and if this is indeed the real plan to build a team around Trae.

[Final_quest]

5 minutes ago, Wretch said:

All of this is had my mind swirling over the summer...and yes, something feels/felt off to me too.  Not just with Trae either.  I can't put my finger on it, and maybe it's just all of the questions I have about the roster, but something has just felt off about this whole offseason.

The start of the season can't get here soon enough.  I am too anxious to see how this team comes together and if this is indeed the real plan to build a team around Trae.

I actually think they made stealth moves that work with or without Trae.  More like we want to keep Trae on our terms not on his terms that would make us less stable.  

If they got another expensive wannabe star, it would be harder to pivot or keep us in treadmill playoff status.  We’d go nowhere with Trae + Lavine and be handcuffed to a bad situation.  I had much better feelings about Ingram or Ayton, but understand if they took a hard stance against either of those guys.    

Though I much prefer the Risacher, Jalen, Dyson, and Okongwu “core” with Trae and Bogi.  That group is a good start on a rebuild even without our 2027 pick.  In either case we can still shop Capela and Hunter this year if a team needs an injury replacement.  

Hope the FO strategy pays off.

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, Wretch said:

All of this is had my mind swirling over the summer...and yes, something feels/felt off to me too.  Not just with Trae either.  I can't put my finger on it, and maybe it's just all of the questions I have about the roster, but something has just felt off about this whole offseason.

I said after the Trades and FA dust settled that I felt uncomfortable and that that feeling won't go away until I see games played. That 'feeling' hasn't changed.

The biggest thing is we hope is that having upgraded the fit, length and defense, it can lead to more wins. But if you ask me if we've increased our overall talent base like Philly did with PG or OKC with Hartenstein, my answer is no.  We didn't upgrade from DJ as pure talent, we are banking on several guys filling his production. A lot of it still falls to Trae to maximize those guys on offense. 

And as long as we have an artificial cap on finances it will always limit what we can do.

[AHF]

One strange thing to me is the idea that we would have had to give up a bunch to trade for someone like LaVine or Ingram.  Nobody wants those guys.  Trading for either of them would have been us dumping contracts like Hunter, Capela, etc. that other team don't really want either.  We wouldn't have been giving up the #1 pick or something to facilitate those deals.  Same for Ayton really.

Now I wasn't excited about either of those wings and Ayton scares me so I've not criticized the team for not doing those deals but it isn't like these are hugely significant for the future of the team.  The two things we did do this summer that are significant for the team's future are:

1) Kept the #1 overall pick.

2) Traded DM for Dyson, the Lakers pick and filler (ranging from short-term help in Nance and a very modest asset with the "worst of" pick to guys who were garbage we had to swallow).

Not moving either of them for nearer-term help is the big decision.  But none of them would have been involved in these Brandon Ingram type trade scenarios so not having done one of those is more of a statement that (a) our owner has no intention of paying the tax (to be generous I'll say "at least as of this year") and (b) we like Hunter and Capela better than these players than it is anything about the overall team.

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

[kg01]

35 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

 

ZR is only there because Capela's his ride home.

#TraeHatesZr

[Final_quest]

10 hours ago, AHF said:

One strange thing to me is the idea that we would have had to give up a bunch to trade for someone like LaVine or Ingram.  Nobody wants those guys.  Trading for either of them would have been us dumping contracts like Hunter, Capela, etc. that other team don't really want either.  We wouldn't have been giving up the #1 pick or something to facilitate those deals.  Same for Ayton really.

Now I wasn't excited about either of those wings and Ayton scares me so I've not criticized the team for not doing those deals but it isn't like these are hugely significant for the future of the team.  The two things we did do this summer that are significant for the team's future are:

1) Kept the #1 overall pick.

2) Traded DM for Dyson, the Lakers pick and filler (ranging from short-term help in Nance and a very modest asset with the "worst of" pick to guys who were garbage we had to swallow).

Not moving either of them for nearer-term help is the big decision.  But none of them would have been involved in these Brandon Ingram type trade scenarios so not having done one of those is more of a statement that (a) our owner has no intention of paying the tax (to be generous I'll say "at least as of this year") and (b) we like Hunter and Capela better than these players than it is anything about the overall team.

No other NBA team traded for Ingram, Ayton or Lavine.  I think we made the same decision everyone else did. 

How did Philly get PG?  The same way OKC got Hartenstein.  Because they had cap space.  

We’re trying to shed bad contracts not commit to the worst contracts in the league.  You think we should have traded for those guys?
 

[AHF]

20 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

No other NBA team traded for Ingram, Ayton or Lavine.  I think we made the same decision everyone else did. 

How did Philly get PG?  The same way OKC got Hartenstein.  Because they had cap space.  

We’re trying to shed bad contracts not commit to the worst contracts in the league.  You think we should have traded for those guys?
 

I literally just said we shouldn’t have.  My comment was that some people have inferred from this fact (some version of) the idea that the team no longer values Trae.  I’m saying that I don’t think the failure to move on these players has anything to say about Trae (including anything bad).  They simply aren’t desirable players for most teams at their price.

[JayBirdHawk]

2025 NBA MVP Wild-Card Sleepers

Trae Young, PG, Atlanta Hawks



MVP Odds/Rank: +25000 (tied for 23rd)

After the Atlanta Hawks traded Dejounte Murray to the New Orleans Pelicans this offseason, Trae Young is poised to put up monster numbers.

The three-time All-Star averaged 28.4 points per game and made the All-NBA third team the year before the Hawks acquired Murray. There's no reason to believe that Young won't be among the league's leading scorers once again.

Young and Murray were the only two Hawks who averaged at least 17 points per game last season. The team got younger by swapping out Murray for a trade package featuring Dyson Daniels and selected 19-year-old Zaccharie Risacher with the No. 1 overall pick.

For Atlanta to have a chance to win most nights, more offensive pressure will fall on Young both as a scorer and as a creator. Granted, team success could hurt his MVP chances.

Following a 36-win season, the Hawks don't exactly look better on paper after trading their second-best player for Daniels, Larry Nance Jr. and draft picks. Risacher isn't going to make the typical impact of a No. 1 pick, and there's a lot of unproven talent on the roster overall. If Young has this team playing .500 basketball, that's a big accomplishment.

Only three players in NBA history have averaged at least 30 points and 10 assists per game: Russell Westbrook, Tiny Archibald and Oscar Robertson. If Young becomes the fourth this season, that could push him into the MVP mix.

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10130915-2025-nba-mvp-race-making-the-case-for-10-wild-card-sleepers

[Final_quest]

1 hour ago, AHF said:

I literally just said we shouldn’t have.  My comment was that some people have inferred from this fact (some version of) the idea that the team no longer values Trae.  I’m saying that I don’t think the failure to move on these players has anything to say about Trae (including anything bad).  They simply aren’t desirable players for most teams at their price.

Gotcha.  

 

13 hours ago, AHF said:

Not moving either of them for nearer-term help is the big decision.  But none of them would have been involved in these Brandon Ingram type trade scenarios so not having done one of those is more of a statement that (a) our owner has no intention of paying the tax (to be generous I'll say "at least as of this year") and (b) we like Hunter and Capela better than these players than it is anything about the overall team.

I see at least one other conclusion which I think is more accurate than either of the ones you are making.  What about liking the idea of shedding Capela's contract in one year or less?  Plus it's easier to move Hunter in the coming years than any of these massive and bad contracts. 

On the one hand we want to sign good players, but on the other hand we're concluding eliminating a guy like Capela's contract could only mean we prefer him + Hunter as players over who they could have been traded for last offseason.  That take ignores the really significant payroll implications of bringing in a guy like Ingram, Ayton, etc.  We're avoiding the payroll suicide is the bigger issue not if we could trade Capela and/or Hunter for a better player this season.  

That's how GMs operate from my perspective.  Winning in the NBA requires patience.  It's not about fielding the best team for the upcoming season, especially if you want to win long term.  

[AHF]

3 hours ago, Final_quest said:

I see at least one other conclusion which I think is more accurate than either of the ones you are making.  What about liking the idea of shedding Capela's contract in one year or less?  Plus it's easier to move Hunter in the coming years than any of these massive and bad contracts. 

On the one hand we want to sign good players, but on the other hand we're concluding eliminating a guy like Capela's contract could only mean we prefer him + Hunter as players over who they could have been traded for last offseason.  That take ignores the really significant payroll implications of bringing in a guy like Ingram, Ayton, etc.  We're avoiding the payroll suicide is the bigger issue not if we could trade Capela and/or Hunter for a better player this season.  

That's how GMs operate from my perspective.  Winning in the NBA requires patience.  It's not about fielding the best team for the upcoming season, especially if you want to win long term.  

I put preferring to keep Capela since his contract is expiring or preferring Hunter because you think he is a better trade asset under the label of preferring Capela and Hunter to the alternative.  Don't you? 

The reason a team prefers one player over another can be for a variety of reasons including contracts or other non-on-the-court reasons.  Hopefully this is obvious given that the reason no one is touching any of these players is because they are overpaid which you know since you just responded to a post that said these players "simply aren’t desirable players for most teams at their price."  It isn't a huge deal to take on overpaid players if you have a ton of cap space or you are indifferent to paying the tax.  We are neither. 

Just to circle back to the original point, the fact that we didn't prefer these overpaid players to CC and/or Hunter has nothing to say about how the team views Trae.  (He is the topic of the thread and my post after all.)  The disdain for these overpaid players to me speaks to how we view the value of those overpaid players compared to how we view CC and/or Hunter (who are also overpaid players but not as overpaid and not overpaid for as long).  So for the people who have interpreted the failure to go after an Ingram as an indication that we no longer value Trae, I just don't see the connection.  I see it as preferring Dyson and the LAL pick to Ingram and while I have my qualms about the trade I agree with that comparison whole-heartedly.  I didn't want Ingram.  I want Dyson and the Lakers pick.  I just wanted more coming with them.  But, again, my post was not trying to focus on the trade (we've other threads for that) and was really trying to focus on what the failure to acquire Ingram, Lavine, etc. says about how the Hawks view Trae.  And I think it doesn't say much if anything.

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

[Final_quest]

2 hours ago, AHF said:

I put preferring to keep Capela since his contract is expiring or preferring Hunter because you think he is a better trade asset under the label of preferring Capela and Hunter to the alternative.  Don't you? 

The reason a team prefers one player over another can be for a variety of reasons including contracts or other non-on-the-court reasons.  Hopefully this is obvious given that the reason no one is touching any of these players is because they are overpaid which you know since you just responded to a post that said these players "simply aren’t desirable players for most teams at their price."  It isn't a huge deal to take on overpaid players if you have a ton of cap space or you are indifferent to paying the tax.  We are neither. 

Just to circle back to the original point, the fact that we didn't prefer these overpaid players to CC and/or Hunter has nothing to say about how the team views Trae.  (He is the topic of the thread and my post after all.)  The disdain for these overpaid players to me speaks to how we view the value of those overpaid players compared to how we view CC and/or Hunter (who are also overpaid players but not as overpaid and not overpaid for as long).  So for the people who have interpreted the failure to go after an Ingram as an indication that we no longer value Trae, I just don't see the connection.  I see it as preferring Dyson and the LAL pick to Ingram and while I have my qualms about the trade I agree with that comparison whole-heartedly.  I didn't want Ingram.  I want Dyson and the Lakers pick.  I just wanted more coming with them.  But, again, my post was not trying to focus on the trade (we've other threads for that) and was really trying to focus on what the failure to acquire Ingram, Lavine, etc. says about how the Hawks view Trae.  And I think it doesn't say much if anything.

Well, in my drunk sounding post I was not getting the connection you were making with Capela/Hunter and not wanting to pay some of the worst contracts in the league.  

Taking it back to Trae.  It could say something about how we view him, not a lot.  If Trae was pushing to make a move for a more established player(s), 90%+ chance he was, the FO decided to do what they thought was best for the franchise in spite of what he wanted.  All it says is that we'd rather risk losing Trae than giving him Lebron shadow GM status. 

[kg01]

2 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

 

Caption contest, you say?

TY: I hate you .. smile for the camera.

ZR: Fromage ... oh, I mean the ... cheese? 

#TraeHaterZR

[AHF]

3 hours ago, Final_quest said:

Well, in my drunk sounding post I was not getting the connection you were making with Capela/Hunter and not wanting to pay some of the worst contracts in the league.  

Taking it back to Trae.  It could say something about how we view him, not a lot.  If Trae was pushing to make a move for a more established player(s), 90%+ chance he was, the FO decided to do what they thought was best for the franchise in spite of what he wanted.  All it says is that we'd rather risk losing Trae than giving him Lebron shadow GM status. 

Well if we start adding conjecture into the mix then we can certainly infer a bit more.  Agree with you there.

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

[kg01]

54 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

 

Oh please,burd.

According to my metrics, Trae shouldn't even be starting.