Let's Talk Trade Ideas!

[sturt]

OOPS!!!

I did screw-up on one thing, though I'm guessing that since no one pointed it out, I didn't mislead anyone anyhow.

Corrected version:

'

 

(Same explanations apply)

[Spud2nique]

2 hours ago, sturt said:

You're a good guy, but it does get exhausting to give you substantive responses, only to find you're just soooooo verrrrrry dug-in, and sooooo verrrrrrry resistant to ever conceding you might need to reconsider your conclusions, that you just blatantly ignore the substance fed back to you.

But I've said as much before, and you laughed it off, so I'm not especially impressed that it's worth the effort to repeat myself as-if it will matter. Spud's opinion is Spud's opinion.

"God grant me the serenity to accept what I can't change."

 

1. (See the blue arrow and the column beneath it.)

 

 

2.

I’m not taking reps away from Cam and Hunt. We need guys that will help push them as stars, not guys looking to have a major role with us. Dipo isn’t gonna be in Schlenk’s timeline. If your Ingram thing had a 2% chance of happening, this might be 2.5%. I can’t see it happening. Schlenk said someone who is 26 or 27. Dipo is over the hill at 28.

[sturt]

1 hour ago, Spud2nique said:

If your Ingram thing had a 2% chance of happening

 

You. Just. Refuse. To get it.

It's.

Not about Ingram.

Not about Davis.

Not about Wood.

Not about Oladipo... or anyone else.

It's difficult to have an intelligent conversation with someone whose responses keep pretending that I'm just tossing out pet cats of his (like you at least are self-aware to acknowledge that that's what you do)... and whose responses give no indication that he understands the actual core premise here is to identify legitimate or potentially legitimate opportunities for Schlenk to add a high tier talent to this roster.

We all like this core. Or, at least you do, and I do.

But Schlenk himself has told you... as much as you seem to ignore it... he's not done adding to the core.

It is a direct and recent quote, and it's showed up in many, many posts by now, so ignoring it serves no purpose but to make a person seem purposefully obtuse and closed-minded.... or, alternatively, just doesn't read.

 

In that same conversation with reporters, he specifically indicated, in direct contrast to what you just said when you said...

1 hour ago, Spud2nique said:

I’m not taking reps away from Cam and Hunt. We need guys that will help push them as stars, not guys looking to have a major role with us.

... that he will not avoid adding one or even two players who can challenge the current core for minutes... and it doesn't take an Einstein or even merely a sturt or a Spud to figure out that of the five positions, those are least likely to be PG or PF... so that leaves you with the other three.

 

So, don't argue with me. Go argue with the GM. Or, better, follow what he tells you he's going to do, and respond to posts as-if you are fully aware and comprehending what he's said.

Shouldn't be too much to ask, but post after post after post and like after like after like, it's clear who among us is actually reconciling our conclusions with what the GM has said and who just is dog-determined to turn a blind eye/deaf ear.

 

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

8 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

I think Oladipo and LaMarcus and a bit too old to get paid what they want to get paid and have a significant role with a rebuilding team like ours. I know you need impact vets but LaMarcus walks on stilts and Dipo is often injured a bit. 
 

Don’t get me wrong I like Dipo as a player a lot because of his heart and how hard he plays, I just think he might not be the greatest of fits for our roster.

I don't think the current level of the Hawks rebuild is in a position to take a risk on a player like Oladipo. 

Reasons:

1. If he doesn't return to form from his last injury we're screwed. In general he misses too many games on average.

2. If he doesn't resign or sign an extension we're screwed. Rumors are Indy offered 4yr/$80mil extention and they're at an impass, meaning he's looking for more than $20 per.

So I don't think we should be giving up assets in this circumstance.

7 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

Yeah I just to get the lack of patients on other poster's part.  Schlenk has his vision of a Hunter/Reddish combo which I happen to agree with and i think you do too.  Lets just see how this plays out next year and if it doesn't look good next season then change should be considered.  It is way too early to give up on these guys now.  Too many teams have made this mistake.

I'm ok with this. I think Schlenk's focus as he's indicated is in shoring up our bench and depth around the Core 5 and Capela. 

Quote

What we’d like to do, ideally, is add guys to our core that we feel like are still growing, maybe not 20-year-olds, 21-year-olds like we have, but maybe guys in their mid-20s who still have room to improve and are maybe coming off their first contract, or that we feel like would be good additions to our group, and try to increase our depth a little bit.” 

Regarding trading our 2020 1st round pick:

Quote

“Obviously our pick is going to be a top-10 pick, so obviously we’ll keep that, unless some great offer came our way, something we couldn’t turn down. 

I take this to mean, a Trae like trade - where we move down in the draft and get a future 1st in 2021 (which is considered a deeper draft) more so than trading it for a player like Dipo which would also include adding a core 5 asset.

[Spud2nique]

11 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

So I don't think we should be giving up assets in this circumstance.

This! I don’t wanna mess up this rebuild. We’ve struggled hard for our assets, let’s cash them in wisely. @sturt

[Buzzard]

2 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I don't think the current level of the Hawks rebuild is in a position to take a risk on a player like Oladipo. 

Reasons:

1. If he doesn't return to form from his last injury we're screwed. In general he misses too many games on average.

2. If he doesn't resign or sign an extension we're screwed. Rumors are Indy offered 4yr/$80mil extention and they're at an impass, meaning he's looking for more than $20 per.

So I don't think we should be giving up assets in this circumstance.

I'm ok with this. I think Schlenk's focus as he's indicated is in shoring up our bench and depth around the Core 5 and Capela. 

Regarding trading our 2020 1st round pick:

I take this to mean, a Trae like trade - where we move down in the draft and get a future 1st in 2021 (which is considered a deeper draft) more so than trading it for a player like Dipo which would also include adding a core 5 asset.

I am not on board with trading away anyone really. If we end up with Edwards or Wiseman, our core will be tough to beat in three years. That is why I like the idea of signing one or two role players for 3 or 4 years with a TO.

Right when their contracts are up, players like Trae, Collins, Reddish, Hunter, Huerter will be hitting their strides. The sell now idea when we have not really given most of them even enough time to finish growing into their bodies seems like a reach to me. There is a good reason other teams fans keep coming up with trade ideas to get some of our talent; its because they are talented and for now they are still pretty cheap also.

[sturt]

  

3 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

If he doesn't return to form from his last injury we're screwed.

Yep. Well. Maybe not "screwed"... ie, we gave up Huerter and Dedmon, and I keep hearing that everyone is pretty optimistic about what we have already on the roster. Hard to imagine that Huerter and Dedmon are huge losses. The draft pick? Yeah, that's not good, depending on how successful that player ends up being. But on the other hand, again, I'm not hearing a lot about how pivotal that player will be to our future success. But I won't be surprised if, all of a sudden, losing 7-ish draft slots is a full-scale crisis... I mean, just given the outcry by the HS version of the Nattering Nabobs of Negativism, right?

On the plus side, there is that thing where your own medical folks have to approve a trade before its completed, and that it's not like he's in some phase of rehab--as Spud can attest, now that he's actually stared at the Games Played numbers for 2019-20 (he did, didn't he???), he returned in February and got 13 games under his belt before the covid layoff.

 

3 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

If he doesn't resign or sign an extension we're screwed.

Right, except, you only do this deal if you're prepared ultimately to give Olapido what they know in Chicago as "the Jimmy Butler treatment."

So, that way, he doesn't have a choice in the matter. You obtain him and give him the max, he's yours.

Scary stuff. You do want to make sure you have no better alternatives, which is why I spoke to that in one of my earliest posts on the subject. Of course, for some people, it's already a done deal to their minds anyhow--AD nor BI will be coming this way, and it's a pipe dream to expect any of the best talent in 2021 to do that since they all will have suitors that have enough money to sign them.

 

3 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Rumors are Indy offered 4yr/$80mil extention and they're at an impass, meaning he's looking for more than $20 per.

Right. It's not that different, really, from the Ingram thing, in that a lot of the reason NOP and IND are cautious is, indeed, the medical side.

According to Pacers bloggers I've read (thus, it seems likely to be popular opinion in Hoosier land), if not for that, IND almost certainly would have already extended him, and for something in the max neighborhood already. He's been "that guy" they intended to build their roster around.

This gives you a sense for how they saw him, and for the most part, still do...

 

CAUTION!!! You might not want to watch this if you're a NNN type. It could be disturbing.

 

3 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I'm ok with this. I think Schlenk's focus as he's indicated is in shoring up our bench and depth around the Core 5 and Capela. 

Quote

What we’d like to do, ideally, is add guys to our core that we feel like are still growing, maybe not 20-year-olds, 21-year-olds like we have, but maybe guys in their mid-20s who still have room to improve and are maybe coming off their first contract, or that we feel like would be good additions to our group, and try to increase our depth a little bit.” 

Um. Hold up there, Debbie Downer...

Somehow you completely ignored the point that our pal Kirschner, in a paragraph right beside that one iirc, said that Schlenk specifically told him that he had no intention to avoid pursuing players who would challenge current starters.

How'd that happen? You're normally so forthcoming about these things even when it doesn't fit the narrative you've chosen on the way to the conclusion you desire.

 

And to the actual point here... there is no "core 5." You just flat-out made that up.

 

No. Schlenk said he's ideally wanting to add to the core... add guys to the core with no concern about whether they are going to be so good that they threaten to take minutes from the existing core.

 

It's not any different than what he's said in the past about team-building. He's being completely consistent with what he's laid out in the previous years about accumulating talent.

 

Putting the bow on this... Jay's cautionary tales are well-taken. There is risk.

The reward is that you add not only a 2x All-Star capable of being an offensive and defensive force at the wing, but never again will you worry that the offense will stagnate when Trae comes off the floor, because of what this guy can do as the primary ballhandler as well...................

 

 

 

[Spud2nique]

10 hours ago, sturt said:

So, don't argue with me. Go argue with the GM. Or, better, follow what he tells you he's going to do, and respond to posts as-if you are fully aware and comprehending what he's said.

I think I hear you. Here is what the team and Schlenk are thinking.

 

The hear of the matter

With George, Leonard, and Patrick Beverley signed to expensive deals, the Clippers may be reluctant to offer Harrell the huge extension that he will be seeking this summer, and it is possible that he will look for a bigger payday elsewhere. With plenty of cap space available, the Hawks will be searching for young talent to play alongside Trae Young, and Harrell appears to be exactly what the team is seeking.

 

[thecampster]

10 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

This! I don’t wanna mess up this rebuild. We’ve struggled hard for our assets, let’s cash them in wisely. @sturt

I have thought really hard about this in the last couple of days. IMHO nobody on the Hawks is untouchable at this point except Trae, Cam.  Maybe Hunter, Maybe Collins but I have to be able to see the big rosy picture in the move and not for anyone 30 and over. 

I don't see "a core" on this team. I see a lot of player that I need to see together for a full season around Trae and an improved/consistent Reddish.

One thing that really bothered me last year was watching Huerter defend. He wasn't strong enough to hold his position and his foot speed/reaction time was slow as well. To fix foot speed you have to get leaner, to fix strength you have to sacrifice foot speed. I can't see Huerter being the defender next to Trae. IMHO he's a bench player for the Hawks going forward and that makes him trade bait in my eyes. On many teams in the league he's the perfect starting 2 but not here. We need to capitalize on other team's needs before his terrible fit becomes too obvious. Cam is the starter at the 2 in my eyes going forward.

[JayBirdHawk]

9 hours ago, sturt said:

  And to the actual point here... there is no "core 5." You just flat-out made that up.

Quote

When the Hawks reconvened in Atlanta at the tail end of the All-Star break, Lloyd Pierce summoned Trae Young, Kevin Huerter, John Collins, De’Andre Hunter, and Cam Reddish for a meeting at the team’s practice facility. As the six men discussed where each player fits into Atlanta’s future and how they might grow together, Pierce showed the numbers on how they have fared on the court and identified the unit’s key strengths and weaknesses. Players spoke up to offer insights and suggestions on how they could get the most out of the Hawks’ final 26 games.

For most of the season, that unit -- the “core five,” as Pierce calls it -- wasn’t available as players dealt with injuries and Collins was suspended for 25 games

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/.amp-Hawks/nba/hawks/news/guys-hawks-leaning-into-youth-trae-young-john-collins-kevin-huerter

 

From the same Athletic article you referenced.

Quote

He’s right. What’s most encouraging about the Hawks and their future is their “Core 5” was their best lineup. Trae Young, Huerter, Cam Reddish, De’Andre Hunter and Collins were a net positive of 10.7 points in 442 possessions together, according to Cleaning The Glass.

 

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, thecampster said:

I have thought really hard about this in the last couple of days. IMHO nobody on the Hawks is untouchable at this point except Trae, Cam.  Maybe Hunter, Maybe Collins but I have to be able to see the big rosy picture in the move and not for anyone 30 and over. 

I don't see "a core" on this team. I see a lot of player that I need to see together for a full season around Trae and an improved/consistent Reddish.

One thing that really bothered me last year was watching Huerter defend. He wasn't strong enough to hold his position and his foot speed/reaction time was slow as well. To fix foot speed you have to get leaner, to fix strength you have to sacrifice foot speed. I can't see Huerter being the defender next to Trae. IMHO he's a bench player for the Hawks going forward and that makes him trade bait in my eyes. On many teams in the league he's the perfect starting 2 but not here. We need to capitalize on other team's needs before his terrible fit becomes too obvious. Cam is the starter at the 2 in my eyes going forward.

I'm not calling them a champion core. They're the core on which the rebuild is taking place - 5 guys 22 and under.

All I'm saying, I'd like to see them play more than less than a quarter of the season together and healthy before moving them for high priced players. I would like for us to have a usable/adequate bench to supplement their skills.

Cam starting next to Trae, with Huerter off the bench is a real possibility next season.

[JayBirdHawk]

Clarification to the Oladipo contract situation with Indy. They're offering a NEW contract 4yrs/$80 mil. ($20 mil per). Seems Dipo wants his current contract extended - 120% of his current salary plus 8% annual raises which equates to $25/$27/$29/$31 million over 4 years. This makes it even easier to pass on with the uncertainty of the future status of the NBA salary cap implications.

 

[sturt]

6 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

I think I hear you. Here is what the team and Schlenk are thinking.

 

The hear of the matter

With George, Leonard, and Patrick Beverley signed to expensive deals, the Clippers may be reluctant to offer Harrell the huge extension that he will be seeking this summer, and it is possible that he will look for a bigger payday elsewhere. With plenty of cap space available, the Hawks will be searching for young talent to play alongside Trae Young, and Harrell appears to be exactly what the team is seeking.

 

 

So, I see how this works.

I quote the GM.

Or someone who is a paid reporter who is him/herself purporting to quote the GM, assuming we can trust him/her (?).

 

You quote... um... who did you quote?... yourself?... Jay?...

 

Okay, so... just for future reference... here's a quote that seems to be relevant suddenly, in case you haven't heard or said this one yourself at some point...

 

 

 

[sturt]

@JayBirdHawk, clever. Nicely played.

But we both understand the context here. Yes? No?

 

It is the head coach's role to..... coach???

And the general manager's role to.... (among other things) acquire talent???

And so, is it accurate then to say that the head coach is, as a matter of routine, speaking from the context of the talent he has (present tense)?... and... the general manager, as a matter of routine or at least where the context of this discussion is concerned is speaking to what talent will be (future tense) acquired?

 

So, is there really any difference when a head coach refers to the existing 5 young players as his "core 5" (and which he did)... versus... when the general manager would use that term (and which he has not, as far as anyone seems to be aware)?

That answer would be a "so it seems."

 

It would be quite the revelation if Schlenk were to be quoted to say there is a core 5 and in using that term to be clearly indicating... as it appears you would like for him to... that there is only an intention to build around the existing players that Pierce referenced.

Why?

(I only keep saying it because you and Spud keep making me say it because you resist with all your cerebral might to acknowledge it...)

Because he's said the opposite already. He's said that ideally he intends to add to the core, and that if in doing so he is able to acquire talent that is better than what we already have, he won't hesitate to do that.

[JayBirdHawk]

13 minutes ago, sturt said:

 

So, I see how this works.

I quote the GM.

Or someone who is a paid reporter who is him/herself purporting to quote the GM, assuming we can trust him/her (?).

 

You quote... um... who did you quote?... yourself?... Jay?...

 

Okay, so... just for future reference... here's a quote that seems to be relevant suddenly, in case you haven't heard or said this one yourself at some point...

 

 

 

...and here we go!  You said I made it up...all I did was prove I DID NOT....so you do your usual. Twist it to make it about who actually said it, used it, referenced it etc.

Keep doing you stu!

 

[JayBirdHawk]

4 minutes ago, sturt said:

@JayBirdHawk, clever. Nicely played.

 

Let me repeat....you said I MADE IT UP....I did not....take your L and move on, I have!

[sturt]

@JayBirdHawk, two things.

First, why you quoted the previous reply to Spud is a mystery. What did that have to do with your comment?

Two... I'm not wrong, actually... it's true you did not "make it up" that someone uttered the term "core 5"... but it's kinda beside the point...

It's not unlike telling me what Trump said, when the conversation was about what Fauci hopes will happen.

Who cares? That doesn't in fact have bearing on what we were talking about.

But I complimented you... it was, indeed, a clever deflection on your part.

EDIT: (Referencing this most recent post...) I know, I know... its frustrating when someone walks through your verbal gymnastics, just when you thought your contortions were being taken as meaningful.

 

[kg01]

Man it's gonna be a loooooooooong offseason.

[JayBirdHawk]

Moving on.

Any interest in trading #1 for Jaylen Brown and #17 from the Celtics. (You know my thoughts about trading with the Sees).

This past offseason, rumor that Schlenk would offer RFA offer to Brown if Celts didn't.

For the #1 pick? No. If we fall outside top #5, under consideration.

[sturt]

18 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Man it's gonna be a loooooooooong offseason.

Hatfields and McCoys.

At least, entertaining.

Well, except that there's not really a "clan" on this side of the screen... unlike the other side. *wink*

 

Sunny day here in NW Louisiana, and hopefully over there in Georgia and otherwise... let's get out and get some fresh air, shall weeeeeeeeeeeeeee???