Take the 25 game pledge (... or if not, modify it to suit your own convictions... )

[Spud2nique]

1 minute ago, sturt said:

We agree.

The blame falls on the teacher for having failed to explain it correctly.  #sorrynotsorry

We must improve as communicators!!!

[sturt]

Nah. I give up.

Lousy teacher or not,

There's no analogy that's getting through to this.

 

[JayBirdHawk]

We are +11 games past the 25 games and starting a new year. Time to end this pledge. It's a new year.

[sturt]

2 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

We are +11 games past the 25 games and starting a new year. Time to end this pledge. It's a new year.

Nonsense.

The standard is not the same as the application of the standard.

It's not about a number, it's about having had sufficient time playing together. I don't make the rules, but I know what they are, and don't pretend that they don't exist.... playing together is not the same thing as being names in a list on a roster on a screen or a piece of paper.

Explained this multiple times by now. No one's tried to debunk it (... the standard, that is)... and that's to all your all's credit, because there's no rational way to debunk it.

Further, explained many times by now that how I apply the standard (ie, settle on a number of games) might be different than others... see the OP header, effectively stating that everyone is free to choose for themselves how to apply the standard... me too, btw.

 

Hence... what was said earlier is what I'm saying today... and I get to be the boss of me, of course.........................................

 

[Gray Mule]

HELP !!  I'VE FALLEN AND CAN'T GET UP!

Expect the unexpected.  But I didn't expect this.  Too many man hours lost, due to injury, with no end in sight.  Team owner gives the team to his son as if were a toy.  

If what we're hearing is true, and I suppose it is, I hope the NBA takes the Hawk team away from it's owner.  This is a travesty of the worst kind.

West coast trip.  Capela out for the entire trip.  Ugh!  Basement, here we come!  How low can you go?  I suppose we're about to find out.  

 

[JayBirdHawk]

2 hours ago, sturt said:

Nonsense.

The standard is not the same as the application of the standard.

It's not about a number, it's about having had sufficient time playing together. I don't make the rules, but I know what they are, and don't pretend that they don't exist.... playing together is not the same thing as being names in a list on a roster on a screen or a piece of paper.

Explained this multiple times by now. No one's tried to debunk it (... the standard, that is)... and that's to all your all's credit, because there's no rational way to debunk it.

Further, explained many times by now that how I apply the standard (ie, settle on a number of games) might be different than others... see the OP header, effectively stating that everyone is free to choose for themselves how to apply the standard... me too, btw.

 

Hence... what was said earlier is what I'm saying today... and I get to be the boss of me, of course.........................................

 

Nope. At this rate we'll never be fully healthy. I jumping in. Coming up shortly.

[JayBirdHawk]

Here's my down and dirty roster conclusion for 2022:

 

Trae and Collins struggling from 3 this badly has been the biggest surprise. I think it has caused a trickle down effect on the entire team. I need both of these guys to step up and take control regardless of the front office turmoil.

DJ not running the team as I expected, too much ISO.

Hunter has not taken the leap and missing games, still see flashes but inconsistent. Can't seem to put a full game together.

Capela has been Capela when available.

OO, seeing the improvement but has to stay out of foul trouble. Would love for him to be more agressive.

Bogi is back from injury but his offense can be hot and cold. His defense oh boy.

AJ, a very bright spot

JJ, he's showing flashes but seems to loose his confidence really quickly. Afraid to shoot from range.

AHol has been the best of the rest of the vet bench

JHol can stay on the bench.

 

Struggling to shoot and guard the 3.

Lack of 3pt shooting from the 4 spot and the 5 spot as well.

Our inability to hold a lead late in games or on the flip side getting down big early and having to battle back.

Get out rebounded in 2nd halfs, especially critical end of game rebounds. Boxing out has become a lost art for this team.

Perimeter defense has been inconsistent and garbage.

Team doesn't seem to be having fun playing with each other.

Team needs to get tougher, physically and mentally.

General talent is there but the game plan is not effective to put it all together.

 

[sturt]

2 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Nope. At this rate we'll never be fully healthy.

That's true ("at this rate"), but the standard is whether our guys have had enough court time that... without going into more precise details but just essentially... they're used to each other.

To my point, that's why my estimation was 25 games as long as BogBog and DJ got 6-8 games together somewhere in all that.

So, I feel like I can safely start reaching some conclusions once this Western swing is done (... like I said).

[shakes]

16 hours ago, sturt said:

 

It's not about a number, it's about having had sufficient time playing together. I don't make the rules,

[AHF]

With Hunter, I don't see the comparison as a scorer to JJ at all.  Hunter has as many games with 10 or fewer points this years as games with 20 or more points.  (Last year it was 17 games with 10 or fewer points and 11 with 20 or more).  At the same age Joe Johnson was a 25 ppg All-Star.  But let's compare instead to his age 23 season.  As the 4th option on Phoenix, he had 30 games of 20+ points vs 13 with 10 or fewer points.  He had 3 games of 30 or more points that year (regular season only).  Hunter has 0 30 point games this year; he had 0 in last year's regular season; he had 0 the prior season.  He had his only regular season 30+ point game as a rookie.

He just doesn't have anything close to what JJ had as a scorer, imo.  I would not compare them at all in that regard.  

I do think this underrates him but check this out if you want to feel sick to your stomach like I do:

If you really want to compare him to a Sun, I would say right now he is closer to a poor man's Mikal Bridges.  Even this season, Bridges is sitting at 3.3 Win Shares compared to 1.1 for Hunter.  Hunter leads Mikal in points per game but Mikal leads in scoring efficiency, rebounding, assists, steals and blocks.  I would trade Hunter for Bridges immediately if the Suns offered.  I would even keep Hunter's higher contract to make the deal happen if that was somehow an option.

I do think Hunter still has growth potential but I had hoped to see more from him this season to date so I'm starting to lose confidence in how much he will blossom this season.  

[Spud2nique]

14 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

agressive

Burd and I lost the spelling bee together. It was a tye for last place.

@sturt

[Spud2nique]

The more I think about it the more I wanna blame this thread as a jinx for all of our failures. I mean think about it..  

Oh btw, @sturt started it if you were wondering..”who was responsible for this perhaps in a jinxy way”… 

 

I’m taking the 82 game pledge. If we don’t make the playoffs in 82 games, I don’t think we deserved it anyways.

-Jack Handy

[sturt]

17 hours ago, sturt said:

it's about having had sufficient time playing together

Shakes thinks this is funny.

Of course he does.

[Spud2nique]

20 minutes ago, sturt said:

Shakes thinks this is funny.

Of course he does.

You have a fan on your side! .. ok not a fan … you have a dude.. lol

[AHF]

35 minutes ago, sturt said:

Shakes thinks this is funny.

Of course he does.

I think shakes is trying to evaluate the team "as it is" (at least in his mind) while you are evaluating the team "as it is when healthy enough to develop chemistry."  He thinks it is funny that you say this because he has no faith the team will ever be healthy and the first 37 games are compelling evidence of this in his mind.  You are, of course, waiting for the team to have long enough together to build chemistry before you assess how good they are when healthy and given time to find their identity on the floor.  As I am interpreting your posts, we are really talking about two different standards. 

(And that is before the issue of how you assess the significance of results of the Hawks when healthy enough to develop chemistry against other teams.)

[shakes]

4 minutes ago, AHF said:

I think shakes is trying to evaluate the team "as it is" (at least in his mind) while you are evaluating the team "as it is when healthy enough to develop chemistry."  He thinks it is funny that you say this because he has no faith the team will ever be healthy and the first 37 games are compelling evidence of this in his mind.  You are, of course, waiting for the team to have long enough together to build chemistry before you assess how good they are when healthy and given time to find their identity on the floor.  As I am interpreting your posts, we are really talking about two different standards. 

(And that is before the issue of how you assess the significance of results of the Hawks when healthy enough to develop chemistry against other teams.)

that's part of it, but I'm also pointing out how Sturt's has changed his pledge from "the first 25 games"  to "let's only evaluate games when the team is healthy".  And then the massively hypocritical part I keep pointing out is that Sturt only thinks it's relevant if our team is healthy and doesn't care if our opponent is healthy or not.

 

So I'm laughing at him for his hypocrisy and his moving of his own goal posts moreso than the fact that this team has not been and never will be fully healthy.

[AHF]

33 minutes ago, shakes said:

that's part of it, but I'm also pointing out how Sturt's has changed his pledge from "the first 25 games"  to "let's only evaluate games when the team is healthy".  And then the massively hypocritical part I keep pointing out is that Sturt only thinks it's relevant if our team is healthy and doesn't care if our opponent is healthy or not.

 

So I'm laughing at him for his hypocrisy and his moving of his own goal posts moreso than the fact that this team has not been and never will be fully healthy.

If you look at sturt's posts on this topic in the past, his addendum that the team needs to be healthy enough to play together is fully consistent with his view from last season.  So I don't view it as hypocritical.  It does shift the goal posts from the OP but in a way that is consistent with his view from prior years.

The issue of how to assess our performance when healthy vs other teams when they are not healthy is an issue where he and I have disagreed in the past.  That was our primary debate around this topic from last year.  But that is a secondary issue.  If you buy into the idea that he really wants to see how good the team is when they play together, you only reach the issue of how to compare that with the rest of the league once that initial criteria is met.  And that hasn't happened here.  If we got 25 healthy games with this team and then sturt or another poster declared that our record during that healthy period represented our true winning% and could be compared against the overall winning % of other teams in the league then I would have big issues with that methodology.  (IMO, that would be comparing apples to oranges.)

So to me it seems like sturt's OP did come with a later addendum but that wasn't hypocritical - it was consistent with the way he evaluated and framed the issue previously.  I don't mind him wanting to evaluate this team on a "when healthy enough to develop some chemistry" basis if he can come up with a way to compare that to the rest of the league on an apples to apples basis. 

(For example, if "healthy" means having 5 of your top 6 players or means having your core players healthy, etc. then we should look at the winning % under those circumstances and compare it against the winning % of teams under those same circumstances.  Any such comparison point will mean the overall winning % for all teams under that criteria will be well above 50%.  The median team might have a 60% winning %.  Don't know until the criteria are defined and the same methodology is used for everyone.)

[Wretch]

1 hour ago, AHF said:

With Hunter, I don't see the comparison as a scorer to JJ at all.  Hunter has as many games with 10 or fewer points this years as games with 20 or more points.  (Last year it was 17 games with 10 or fewer points and 11 with 20 or more).  At the same age Joe Johnson was a 25 ppg All-Star.  But let's compare instead to his age 23 season.  As the 4th option on Phoenix, he had 30 games of 20+ points vs 13 with 10 or fewer points.  He had 3 games of 30 or more points that year (regular season only).  Hunter has 0 30 point games this year; he had 0 in last year's regular season; he had 0 the prior season.  He had his only regular season 30+ point game as a rookie.

He just doesn't have anything close to what JJ had as a scorer, imo.  I would not compare them at all in that regard.  

I do think this underrates him but check this out if you want to feel sick to your stomach like I do:

If you really want to compare him to a Sun, I would say right now he is closer to a poor man's Mikal Bridges.  Even this season, Bridges is sitting at 3.3 Win Shares compared to 1.1 for Hunter.  Hunter leads Mikal in points per game but Mikal leads in scoring efficiency, rebounding, assists, steals and blocks.  I would trade Hunter for Bridges immediately if the Suns offered.  I would even keep Hunter's higher contract to make the deal happen if that was somehow an option.

I do think Hunter still has growth potential but I had hoped to see more from him this season to date so I'm starting to lose confidence in how much he will blossom this season.  

We are mostly in complete agreement.  I've said, and repeated, many times over that I'm not comparing the two directly:

On 12/29/2022 at 1:24 PM, Wretch said:

We're still in agreement on Hunter.    First, I am ~NOT~ a Hunter "stan" as some people like to use the word.  I don't see him as an alpha scorer either.  I do not think there is any direct comparison to JJ.  They are two completely different players.  Despite being the same size, JJ was 100% guard and Hunter is 100% forward.  JJ was a sniper, could run the offense, and was good at backing guys down and shooting in midrange.  Hunter is more athletic and his game is more physical.  Joe was always criticized for his inability to draw fouls - some suggested that this was one of the key things that kept JJ from reaching that next level. 

Again, I'm not comparing the game of these two.  I'm only saying that there is a similarly in their situations.   In the same way JJ benefitted greatly from moving from 4th option to 1st, Hunter is also playing behind multiple players and could benefit from moving up from 3rd option (4th if you count JC looking for his touches).  Especially in a different system without two ball-dominant guards.

JJ is an alpha scorer, but a definite 1B.  I think Hunter is a very good role player that ~could be~ a 1B in the right system and with the right coach.  He has zero chance of being that playing behind Trae and DJM.  Again, I'm not a Hunter fan and in no way am I saying that Hunter is going to break out into this amazing multi-time All Star.  I'm saying he's not trash and has the tools to be a better and more consistent player than we've seen - and what we've seen is still pretty good.

My opinion of Hunter is less about...  Well actually, it's not at all about his ability to break out as an alpha or anything close to a player that can score and/or carry a team.  Not statistically.  Not from a leadership perspective.

I think he is the wrong fit for this system, and with the players therein, even if we were winning games.  We have two ball-dominant, alpha scorers, ahead of him that excel at getting into the painted area.  He has the physical tools to be much better, but +++IF+++ Hunter was going to live up to that potential this is probably the least ideal situation for him to do so.

Hypothetical: Let's say he somehow "leveled up" what he has in his bag.  What would that look like?  He'd be a 3rd dribble penetration option, but far less adept at passing in a system that doesn't reward passing the ball.  His only real value then would be as a consistent 3pt shooter.

This is where I'm drawing a comparison to JJ's situation, not his game.  Joe Johnson was on a better team, in a better offense, with a different skillset that better complimented the players around him.  However, he still had options ahead of him.  In the same way that we saw a different JJ once he was promoted in the offense, I believe we will see a different version of De'Andre Hunter.  My opinion is that his floor is 1C and he has the tools to be a 1B in the right system.  Ultimately, I believe he's going to find a valuable place on a contender though not necessarily as the centerpiece.  I do not think that place is here due to fit with the players we have and the offense that we're running.

[Wretch]

17 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

General talent is there but the game plan is not effective to put it all together.

+1 to all that...and +1000 to that last sentence there...

[Wretch]

Final thoughts as we start the new year:

JC and Capela:
I can't say any more than what I've already said about JC:

Spoiler

From the Collins trade thread:

On 12/23/2022 at 7:21 AM, Wretch said:

I'm someone who is reluctant to make predictions at the start of the season...let alone base my entire opinion of a player on one game and from a single play.  Obviously this isn't about one highlight.  We've been watching him for years and I've probably given JC more attention than any other Hawks player.  This is why my opinion of him changed from trade bait to my favorite player on the team.

Collins is not a Tier 1 scorer.  I am not suggesting that he could carry us offensively, neither do I expect us to defer to him over Trae/DJM in clutch situations.  That's more of a conversation stemming from 2+ seasons ago and even then, I didn't suggest that Collins was that kind of player.  So, let's just get that out of the way.  

My opinion is that he is a very good complimentary piece - which is what we need more so than another alpha scorer.  I don't have time to sew together a montage of highlights for JC, but there's a good sampling of what he is capable of from this game against Orlando earlier in the season:

Collins is capable of playing like that every game, but this offense with the addition of DJM is impacting him mightily.   We are stubbornly focused on midrange/PNR.  We're good at it, so the defense unsurprisingly...is locking the paint down.  That affects Collins the same as it does our back court - except he's not the same kind of ISO baller.  Ball movement and perimeter shooting will give space for JC to score in the post (as the highlight was showing), but this offense is laughably light on both.  He was already losing touches to Capela.  With the addition of DJM as an alpha mid-range scorer and Hunter now stepping up as the 3rd in line to "take a turn"...Collins does not have the space or the touches (which most players need to get in a rhythm) to be an effective/consistent 3rd option. 

As it was last year, his only real opportunity is spot up shooter.  This is where I have to concede because he is struggling mightily with his 3pt shot.  However, JC was shooting ~39% from long distance over a three year window.  That's a pretty strong indicator for a PF.

 

It's hard to say whether or not the Trae/Cap/Collins trio is ideal.  I love both of our big men, and we did go all the way to the ECF's...  I still believe in them.  It's just hard to ignore that Capela is mostly useless on offense if he's not being used in the 1/5 PNR and a valuable piece of Collins' game is nerfed otherwise.  It's not optimal, but it is what it is...  Now throw in the fact that Okongwu is right there clawing at a starter's job at F/C. 

I don't have any answers there.  The only thing I will add is that a big man that can pull help defenders is as valuable to Trae, if not more so, than the skillset that DJM has.  I've always been on board with making a move for a player that could fill that role.  I've said many times that I like our guys and don't want any major trades.  However, if I were pressed to give an answer as to what moves I would make, then it  would be for an impact big man or an alpha sniper at the 3.

Onyeka Okongwu
There is more to this dude offensively than I initially saw @Spud2nique.  It's not the jumpshot that's got me interested, even though I definitely see potential there.  OO has a way of moving in the paint...  I don't know how describe it.  Your boy is extremely smooth and fluid moving through the paint.  Not just moving without the ball...  The way he twists and rolls towards the basket when he has the ball is very effective.

He's a starter and we should be developing his game.  Which complicates the way I see our front court situation.  Something has to give.  If there is a trade to be made, I'm not putting OO in there unless there's something phenomenal coming back.   

...and Nate.
This is something else we don't have to talk about.  Just as there are players that master the nuances of the game and rise above their peers, there are little things here and there that really bother me about Nate.  Rigid rotations, non-challenges, questionable decisions in the clutch like who should be on the floor or inbounding the ball in clutch situations.  Like last night, why was Trae on the floor?  We're tied with 8 seconds left and trying to get that game into 3OT...we need a stop.

The big thing with Nate though is that this team has no plan going into key possessions.  None.  We simply default to pounding the ball and hero-ball.  Instead of playing to win with a lead, we try to milk the clock and for some reason...do the expected: challenge the zone with Trae/DJM.

The pattern is clear.  We get down big and storm back.  That's not the mark of a team without talent.  Usually, that's what a young team with talent and inexperience does...but we have a decent mix of veterans and our core is not green anymore.  I said that eyes would shift to Nate before the season and it's been that way for awhile.  I don't know who the right candidate is, but hopefully we've been scouting them for awhile.  I don't see a turnaround happening this season and honestly, we're legitimately in danger of missing the playoffs.  Especially considering a play-in battle.

The rest...
Bogi is Bogi.  He is in the perfect role as a gunner off the bench.  If you'll notice though, whenever Bogi is knocking down shots we do very well.  Bogi is our x-factor because of his ability to stretch the floor.  We so need a sniper in the starting lineup.
Aaron Holiday is a keeper.  He is still doing the things that we picked up on early in the preseason.  Justin is situationally solid and not nearly as consistent as his brother.
Jalen Johnson - I'm still very high on him, but I wouldn't be mad if we packed him to level up in the post.  A portion of the minutes he's getting now should have come last year and there was PLENTY of opportunity for it.
We don't need to talk about AJ Griffin.
The only other player that I have an opinion on is Frank Kaminsky.  I don't expect a whole lot, but I like his 3pt shot.