2023-24 Insider Information Thread

[KB21]

2 minutes ago, Mikey said:

How do you know how he’s gonna play under Quin when he hasn’t played a minute under Quin? 

He’s going to play how he has always played.  

[KB21]

Ingram will suddenly have to become a style of player that he’s never had a desire to be.  This is a guy who is expecting a $50 million plus APR contract next year.  Do you really think, in a contract year, that he’s going to settle on being a catch and shoot option and not the primary or secondary option.  

[NekiEcko]

3 minutes ago, KB21 said:

If you take Clingan, he might be the team’s 5th or 6th best player as a rookie.  When he’s in his third year, he’s still going to be no better than the 5th or 6th best player on the team.  
 

Alex Sarr is probably the 3rd best player on the team by year three.  

Here's the concern: in three years, Trae Young may no longer be with us. It seems the front office is aware that if they don't perform well in the coming years, the consequences could extend beyond losing high draft picks to potentially losing Trae Young as well. Therefore, their current moves are akin to a hail mary; if they don't succeed, the team could face a dire future.

[RedDawg#8]

Who cares if it takes 3 years to develop. We could add Herb and Ingram or whoever you want and we still aren’t winning a championship tomorrow. No matter what unless it’s Giannis, Embiid or a bonafide MVP candidate we do not have a championship window right now. We need more time to gel together especially if we are turning over 3 starters this offseason. The goal should be to get back in to the playoffs and make noise. By the time we get the actual championship or bust itch our rookie will be a young vet.

Forget the draft pick in the grand scheme of on court results for 2024-25, nobody in this draft is that guy to change a franchise overnight. If we want to win now then we have to judge the moves that bring in veteran talent and building around Trae.

We aren’t winning a ring until we get that part right. It may take more than 3 years to do that. So we need to project this draft pick long term, not tomorrow.

[kg01]

34 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

Okay, maybe I'll be more direct. 

Trading away the 1st pick in an NBA draft as a win-now move for a team that was deservedly in the lottery, at 36-46, with one star player that is young (25 years old) and a poorly constructed roster, is completely asinine.

Yeah we agree here.  What are we even arguing about?  You just don't like my cologne or something? 

[NekiEcko]

2 minutes ago, RedDawg#8 said:

Who cares if it takes 3 years to develop. We could add Herb and Ingram or whoever you want and we still aren’t winning a championship tomorrow. No matter what unless it’s Giannis, Embiid or a bonafide MVP candidate we do not have a championship window right now. We need more time to gel together especially if we are turning over 3 starters this offseason. The goal should be to get back in to the playoffs and make noise. By the time we get the actual championship or bust itch our rookie will be a young vet.

Forget the draft pick in the grand scheme of on court results for 2024-25, nobody in this draft is that guy to change a franchise overnight. If we want to win now then we have to judge the moves that bring in veteran talent and building around Trae.

We aren’t winning a ring until we get that part right. It may take more than 3 years to do that. So we need to project this draft pick long term, not tomorrow.

Then you might have to trade Trae if you want to go to the long term, because I dont think he want to be on another rebuilding team.

[KB21]

Just now, NekiEcko said:

Then you might have to trade Trae if you want to go to the long term, because I dont think he want to be on another rebuilding team.

Taking a long view is not rebuilding.  

[JeffS17]

3 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Yeah we agree here.  What are we even arguing about?  You just don't like my cologne or something? 

The context of the post I responded to (that you then responded to me) was about winning now and trading the first pick for #4 and #8!!!

[RedDawg#8]

2 minutes ago, NekiEcko said:

Here's the concern: in three years, Trae Young may no longer be with us. It seems the front office is aware that if they don't perform well in the coming years, the consequences could extend beyond losing high draft picks to potentially losing Trae Young as well. Therefore, their current moves are akin to a hail mary; if they don't succeed, the team could face a dire future.

Clingan is not a Hail Mary move. He is a screen pass.

A Hail Mary would be aiming for highest potential outcome, not safest.

If our draft pick was a determining factor in keeping Trae he might have expressed more excitement about it by now.

What will keep Trae is bringing in All Star talent to make it look like we are trying to win now. Even if we strike out, adding high level talent will appease that competitive edge. We are more likely to pacify him with Herb and Ingram than any of these rookies. I wish we would eliminate them from the discourse if win now moves because none if them help us win now. Not even Donovan “safest bet” Clingan.

[JeffS17]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

Taking a long view is not rebuilding.  

It's like people forgot how to build a sustainable, winning, program after the Hinkie saga.  Somehow people think you have to either be losing intentionally and tanking or making a bunch of ill-advised all-in moves that mortgage your future.  The model programs over the past decades have done neither of those things.

[KB21]

Thinking that Ingram is a win now move is foolish.  He’s a bad fit with Trae.  

[Hawkish]

3 minutes ago, RedDawg#8 said:

Clingan is not a Hail Mary move. He is a screen pass.

A Hail Mary would be aiming for highest potential outcome, not safest.

If our draft pick was a determining factor in keeping Trae he might have expressed more excitement about it by now.

What will keep Trae is bringing in All Star talent to make it look like we are trying to win now. Even if we strike out, adding high level talent will appease that competitive edge. We are more likely to pacify him with Herb and Ingram than any of these rookies. I wish we would eliminate them from the discourse if win now moves because none if them help us win now. Not even Donovan “safest bet” Clingan.

How about we go for a post route rather than Hail Mary?

[NekiEcko]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

Taking a long view is not rebuilding.  

Well, you can look at that as rebuilding because Trae is not going to wait three years for Sarr to be the best version of himself because he will on a different team.

[KB21]

Just now, NekiEcko said:

Well, you can look at that as rebuilding because Trae is not going to wait three years for Sarr to be the best version of himself because he will on a different team.

So you are going to let Trae Young keep you from drafting the best player, instead taking a player who will never be any better than the 5th best player on the team.  

[thecampster]

22 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

It's amazing how different our perspectives are because I actually value your opinions around our roster decisions. 

I believe the exact opposite -- trying to take more win-now players is going to ensure we stay on the hamster wheel and trading the #1 pick is forgoing our opportunity to exit the hamster wheel and start climbing back up the mountain to competing for a chip.  We don't need more mediocre-good talent; we need top end talent.

So I posted a long video showing Sarr possessions last season. Some the highlights you've seen, and some really rough possessions. Realize he shot 28% from 3. Shot poorly on jumpers. If we draft him, it's as a 5. His best attribute right now is his vertical leap. You don't get that on a player his height. Part of why he's so springy, is he's got a great frame but it's not filled out. It's light. To play the 5, he needs to add weight (that takes time to do right). That weight could easily impact his springiness. I don't hate the guy. If this was us 5 years ago, stable of picks to spend and rebuilding, I could see it. But 1/2 picks in 4 years and no cap to spend, we need more swings, not to get caught up in potential.

The set picks thing. We have a once in a generation pick n roll point guard. 50% of our offensive sets begin with the center or pf setting a pick for Trae. The other big not setting the pick goes to the 3 point line. If he can't set the pick and can't pop, he can only roll but that requires a good pick. If he is the other big, he has to sit at the 3 point line to draw the other big out. If he can't shoot better than 33%, that big will sag off of him stopping the other pick n roll. The picker has to set a good pick and the non pick big has to be a threat from 3. This is why JC became a 3 point shooter, because the only thing Clint can do is pick/roll (not pop).  If Sarr can't set a pick right right now and can't reliably hit a 3 or a jump shot. There is zero benefit until he can.

Edited June 5 by thecampster

[RedDawg#8]

3 minutes ago, NekiEcko said:

Then you might have to trade Trae if you want to go to the long term, because I dont think he want to be on another rebuilding team.

Unless Lebron or KD walk through the door I don’t know how Trae could think we are going to be contenders overnight. There are a handful of players with that impact and none will be in a Hawks jersey next season.

You have to keep it real. A DJ for BI swap is keeping equal talent. Him plus Herb equals better fits next to Trae. If Quin can turn DJ and Hunter in to volume 3 point shooters then I trust he can convince Ingram to do the same.

Any deals that are centered around replacing key players for cap relief and picks are what’s going to drive Trae away. We have to spend money. But I don’t think that dictates the draft. This pick was a gift and a curse. We weren’t ever getting a day 1 contributor from this draft but now the pressure is on to make the most of the 1st pick because it not only defines our franchise, but the rest of the league as well.

[RedDawg#8]

4 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Thinking that Ingram is a win now move is foolish.  He’s a bad fit with Trae.  

So was DJ. My point isn’t about what we think, it’s about what shows Trae we are trying to win and not rebuilding.

Ingram is a better fit than DJ and that alone is a step in the right direction from a strategic standpoint. I’m not banking this team’s success on Ingram. Trae is the focus. Adding talent around him versus trading talent away to save money. 

[JeffS17]

1 minute ago, thecampster said:

So I posted a long video showing Sarr possessions last season. Some the highlights you've seen, and some really rough possessions. Realize he shot 28% from 3. Shot poorly on jumpers. If we draft him, it's as a 5. His best attribute right now is his vertical leap. You don't get that on a player his height. Part of why he's so springy, is he's got a great frame but it's not filled out. It's light. To play the 5, he needs to add weight (that takes time to do right). That weight could easily impact his springiness. I don't hate the guy. If this was us 5 years ago, stable picks to spend and rebuilding, I could see it. But 1/2 picks in 4 years and no cap to spend, we need more swings, not to get caught up in potential.

The set picks thing. We have a once in a generation pick n roll point guard. 50% of our offensive sets begin with the center or pf setting a pick for Trae. The other big not setting the pick goes to the 3 point line. If he can't set the pick and can't pop, he can only roll but that requires a good pick. If he is the other big, he has to sit at the 3 point line to draw the other big out. If he can't shoot better than 33%, that big will sag off of him stopping the other pick n roll. The picker has to set a good pick and the non pick big has to be a threat from 3. This is why JC became a 3 point shooter, because the only thing Clint can do is pick/roll (not pop).  If Sarr can't set a pick right right now and can't reliably hit a 3 or a jump shot. There is zero benefit until he can.

Yeah I know we disagree on Sarr as a player -- I don't judge prospects for who they are today, only by what I think they can become and how confident I am they will get there.  No prospect is going to help us next year or in 3 years if they don't improve significantly from what they are today.

I was only noting that your posts were pretending like trading the #1 pick is a cap saving move when it is objectively not.

[KB21]

Wemby was a 27% three-point shooter in France his last season there.  I guess he’s never going to be able to space the floor.  

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, RedDawg#8 said:

So was DJ. My point isn’t about what we think, it’s about what shows Trae we are trying to win and not rebuilding.

Ingram is a better fit than DJ and that alone is a step in the right direction from a strategic standpoint. I’m not banking this team’s success on Ingram. Trae is the focus. Adding talent around him versus trading talent away to save money. 

So, do you them pay him the $50 plus miller per season that it will take to keep him?   It’s a shitastic contract, but apparently giving the impression that you are trying to win is the goal.  Not actually winning.