2023-24 Insider Information Thread

[JTB]

1 minute ago, BangHolman said:

We always discuss KAT

Yup I know. But that was months ago and a year or so back when the Wolves didn’t seem like they’d pan out after the Gobert trade.

to discuss KAT today it’s different from value perspective in my opinion. At first it was a Murray for KAT plus fillers in the trade but with Wolves making the WCF and KAT being a big reason why they got far , you cannot say Murray is as valuable as KAT anymore.

Murray + Hunter probably can no longer get you KAT.  Wolves would probably ask for Trae, in which then we’d say no or at least should ….just depends.

[BangHolman]

5 minutes ago, JTB said:

Yup I know. But that was months ago and a year or so back when the Wolves didn’t seem like they’d pan out after the Gobert trade.

to discuss KAT today it’s different from value perspective in my opinion. At first it was a Murray for KAT plus fillers in the trade but with Wolves making the WCF and KAT being a big reason why they got far , you cannot say Murray is as valuable as KAT anymore.

Murray + Hunter probably can no longer get you KAT.  Wolves would probably ask for Trae, in which then we’d say no or at least should ….just depends.

Oh I know. I was joking too. Every off-season or trade deadline for what feels like the last 3 seasons, he's been the talk of the site.

[terrell]

5 hours ago, Gray Mule said:

What does KAT have to offer to Atlanta that Sarr doesn't?  I'll say experience, knowing Sarr is 21 and has only played professionally since age 14, old age and the expectations of missing a lot of games due to injury.  

Oh, yes!  There will be a slight difference in the payroll hit with those posters who are aware of such things.

Sarr is 19...

[ShooterSays]

Some of y'all really didn't learn your lesson 1 year ago with KAT, huh?

SMH...

[capstone21]

1 hour ago, Sothron said:

I am trying not to get into this KAT discussion. He  played great against Denver in the playoffs. He's having a bad series against the Mavs but they wouldn't even BE THERE had it not been for KAT in the 2nd round. 

Either way, he is not the right piece for our puzzle.  

[JayBirdHawk]

The Indiana Pacers acquired Pascal Siakam from the Toronto Raptors this past January with both the player and team anticipating a probable long-term contract coming in the offseason. Siakam and the Raptors were unable to agree to an extension, which led to a trade for a package centered on Bruce Brown Jr. and three first round picks.

The Pacers are reportedly preparing a five-year max contract offer to Siakam.

"They understand it's a maximum level contract commitment you're going to have with Pascal Siakam," said Shams Charania. "That's what they're preparing to offer him this summer. He wants to be there. There's mutual interest in getting a deal done."

Charania expects the summer "to be a little quiet" for the Pacers with internal improvement more likely than significant roster change.

SHAMS CHARANIA/THE ATHLETIC

[Jdawgflow]

3 hours ago, AHF said:

We did tank the playoff game.  No Vit = massive hole on the roster.  The front office wanted us to lose that game and get in the mix for a lottery pick.  It paid off.  Now we need to capitalize on that pick.

The fact that this statement is true is very sad.

[AHF]

8 minutes ago, Jdawgflow said:

The fact that this statement is true is very sad.

It goes to the other threads where we've discussed how many injury prone players we have and how this roster was constructed with so little depth last season.

[AtLaS]

25 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

The Indiana Pacers acquired Pascal Siakam from the Toronto Raptors this past January with both the player and team anticipating a probable long-term contract coming in the offseason. Siakam and the Raptors were unable to agree to an extension, which led to a trade for a package centered on Bruce Brown Jr. and three first round picks.

The Pacers are reportedly preparing a five-year max contract offer to Siakam.

"They understand it's a maximum level contract commitment you're going to have with Pascal Siakam," said Shams Charania. "That's what they're preparing to offer him this summer. He wants to be there. There's mutual interest in getting a deal done."

Charania expects the summer "to be a little quiet" for the Pacers with internal improvement more likely than significant roster change.

SHAMS CHARANIA/THE ATHLETIC

Thank the lord we didn't trade for him.  I want nothing to do with giving up 3 first rounders for the privilege of paying Siakam 60+ million per year.  Love Siakam but not at that price.

Indy is screwed.

[Hawkish]

21 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

Thank the lord we didn't trade for him.  I want nothing to do with giving up 3 first rounders for the privilege of paying Siakam 60+ million per year.  Love Siakam but not at that price.

Indy is screwed.

Agreed - I think Oprah must be in charge of NBAPA negotiations.  

[JeffS17]

24 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

Thank the lord we didn't trade for him.  I want nothing to do with giving up 3 first rounders for the privilege of paying Siakam 60+ million per year.  Love Siakam but not at that price.

Indy is screwed.

It's a desperation play, one that I'm happy our FO took no part in, even if I liked his fit as a player.  I count this is a good non-move on Landry's resume.

[KB21]

34 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

Thank the lord we didn't trade for him.  I want nothing to do with giving up 3 first rounders for the privilege of paying Siakam 60+ million per year.  Love Siakam but not at that price.

Indy is screwed.

Yet some want to trade for Brandon Ingram.  

[TheNorthCydeRises]

2 hours ago, capstone21 said:

Either way, he is not the right piece for our puzzle.  

I don't think anyone is the right piece for our puzzle.

So do we just refuse to do the puzzle?

[AtLaS]

11 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

I don't think anyone is the right piece for our puzzle.

So do we just refuse to do the puzzle?

It's tough to find the right pieces, we certainly do have to make some moves though.  Each players value is mostly tied to his contract, unless they are a top 10 player.  DJM is GREAT value on his contract.  If he was on a max deal, he wouldn't be.  I don't want Siakam at 5/250 or whatever the number is.  I don't want Ingram at 5/250 either.  But any move for a non star making a ton of money is a huge risk, although I do agree we need to make a move.

I'll take KAT but wouldn't give up the world for him.  He's been bad in the playoffs his whole career.  Granted he's never played with a PG anywhere close to Trae so that could help.  He would need to play the 5 here though.   We have to space the floor.  No more non-shooting C's.  Won't work.

Honestly as long as we take Sarr I'm good with pretty much anything else.  I believe in that kid.

[AtLaS]

The 2nd apron is still brand new.  We haven't seen the full impact of it yet.  Many teams are going to bury themselves giving out these max contracts to non all-star players.  They don't even realize it yet.  Non stars making 50-60 million are going to quickly become negative value contracts that can't be moved and the teams will be stuck.

[RedDawg#8]

6 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

The 2nd apron is still brand new.  We haven't seen the full impact of it yet.  Many teams are going to bury themselves giving out these max contracts to non all-star players.  They don't even realize it yet.  Non stars making 50-60 million are going to quickly become negative value contracts that can't be moved and the teams will be stuck.

I agree with the sentiment, but I guarantee you there are people within these organizations that are very aware of the financial ramifications and risks moving forward and they have decided that it’s a risk (investment) worth making in order to try and win a championship.

Mostly, it’s the owners signing off on the commitments and in the end it’s their money. But, underneath that, the FO’s are willing to come off the role players and replace them with vet mins when it comes time to save money. The idea is that you’re committing to a handful of key guys for a lot off money and filling out around them. They are not interested in the Hawks model of 7 to 9 good but not great players all making $18+ million to not be a contender. 

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

I don't think anyone is the right piece for our puzzle.

So do we just refuse to do the puzzle?

Hawks stay playing with a 9 piece toddler puzzle at the kiddy table.

They refuse to play with the 1000 piece puzzle.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

6 hours ago, kg01 said:

You gonna have to sell me on a plan B to work while Towns is out injured tho. 

 

Plan B?

Let's see . . 

 

 

Oh . . . I got it!

 

 

Plan B is ALWAYS Bruno

 

Dang . .  why all of these pics so damn big?

[RedDawg#8]

4 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Hawks stay playing with a 9 piece toddler puzzle at the kiddy table.

They refuse to play with the 1000 piece puzzle.

This is the biggest frustration. I don’t care if it falls flat on its face (I do) just have a vision and stick to it. We all knew it was not going to be easy to build around Trae, but we at least had a plan in the beginning and saw that it could work even if we weren’t a finished product at the time. We have sacrificed a lot of fit for finance and the results are what they are.

[JTB]

4 hours ago, bleachkit said:

We don't need an overpriced possibly declining KAT. Look at the moves Knicks and Mavs made. They brought in some high energy defensive dogs. That's what we should be doing. 

You want Sarr + Clingan too then right ???

sign you up? 

4 hours ago, bleachkit said:

We don't need an overpriced possibly declining KAT. Look at the moves Knicks and Mavs made. They brought in some high energy defensive dogs. That's what we should be doing. 

You want Sarr + Clingan too then right ???

sign you up?