2023-24 Insider Information Thread

[MarylandHawk]

2 hours ago, REHawksFan said:

Was listening to a pod yesterday while traveling and Risacher was described offensively  as a tall wing with a limited handle that can't create for himself and is a streaky shooter. Defensively, he's really good off the ball but not great as a poa defender. Lacks athleticism.

So basically he's DeAndre Hunter 2.0. Why the heck would we draft him 1st overall?

I honestly think the only reason he's this highly thought of is because the Spurs are rumored to like him. 

I think those are pessimistic evaluations of him. He is clearly athletic. He moves like a 2 gaurd and is almost 6’9”. He has hops too. If he plays up one spot defensively, his length will bother gaurds and small forwards. Can’t create and not having been asked to create is two different things. That’s why it is important to have a development plan for the pick. I am not pounding the table for the guy, but he is one of the better prospects in this class. 

[Bonzaii58]

6 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

Smart still for me.

 

They have Bane and Kennard. 

I think Smart moves on.

 

This would be outstanding. Almost too smart of a decision for our FO to make. 

[Afro]

4 minutes ago, kg01 said:

"Don't need it to make sense, just need it to get clicks.  Mission accomplished?" - BSPN

The wording that catches my eye is "widely discussed among teams".  That's meant to be (mis)interpreted more impactfully than it is.  They play word and mind games with people. 

Also, the 'get tha pix back' narrative is so lame.  Just stahhp.

I'm still just so confused. 

The underlying logic is that the Hawks *want* to be bad and rebuild. 

Who tf has EVER said that? 

[Hawkish]

6 minutes ago, Bonzaii58 said:

This would be outstanding. Almost too smart of a decision for our FO to make. 

I like Smart.  Odd that the program suggests -10 wins after the deal.  Boston has certainly improved a lot since his departure.  Do you think White is just a huge improvement over him?  (What a great trade Boston made with the Spurs; imagine giving up a later 1st for White rather than 3 potentially higher picks for DJ)

[kg01]

13 minutes ago, MarylandHawk said:

I think those are pessimistic evaluations of him. He is clearly athletic. He moves like a 2 gaurd and is almost 6’9”. He has hops too. If he plays up one spot defensively, his length will bother gaurds and small forwards. Can’t create and not having been asked to create is two different things. That’s why it is important to have a development plan for the pick. I am not pounding the table for the guy, but he is one of the better prospects in this class. 

Perhaps but the measures of size and explosiveness are bad for Rissacher, based on available test results.  That's objective and not good for a wing prospect expected to go at the top of the draft.

[KB21]

21 minutes ago, MarylandHawk said:

I think those are pessimistic evaluations of him. He is clearly athletic. He moves like a 2 gaurd and is almost 6’9”. He has hops too. If he plays up one spot defensively, his length will bother gaurds and small forwards. Can’t create and not having been asked to create is two different things. That’s why it is important to have a development plan for the pick. I am not pounding the table for the guy, but he is one of the better prospects in this class. 

He isn't that long.  He's only #1 on wingspan to height.  Also, his max vertical was 30 inches.  He's a better two-foot jumper than one foot jumper.  The tools are very average.

[JayBirdHawk]

41 minutes ago, kg01 said:

"Don't need it to make sense, just need it to get clicks.  Mission accomplished?" - BSPN

The wording that catches my eye is "widely discussed among teams".  That's meant to be (mis)interpreted more impactfully than it is.  They play word and mind games with people. 

Also, the 'get tha pix back' narrative is so lame.  Just stahhp.

That jumped out to me too.  

[KB21]

Siakam gets a 4 year, $190 million deal.

[bleachkit]

50 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

This is wording is confusing - is it saying Trae for #4 and the 2025 pick back or one or the other.

 

 

I think they were separate remarks. He's not suggesting Trae is part of the trade. 

[KB21]

Pistons fire Monty Williams.

[JayBirdHawk]

55 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

This is wording is confusing - is it saying Trae for #4 and the 2025 pick back or one or the other.

 

 

More fodder to add to the confusion.

"The Atlanta Hawks seem to be honing in on either Zaccharie Risacher or Donovan Clingan but might have trade opportunities at their disposal on draft night, especially if the San Antonio #Spurs are interested in making a deal," writes ESPN Insider Jonathan Givony

 

Jonathan Givony

@DraftExpress

was on ESPN with

@WindhorstESPN

to discuss how the Spurs might weigh trading next year's unprotected pick to Atlanta in order to pick at #1 instead of the #Hawks.

 

All this says to me is that NOBODY has quite the handle on what the Hawks will do.

[Packfill]

20 minutes ago, KB21 said:

He isn't that long.  He's only #1 on wingspan to height.  Also, his max vertical was 30 inches.  He's a better two-foot jumper than one foot jumper.  The tools are very average.

I agree that the testing did him no favors, and for that reason I would not take him #1 even in this draft.  That said, I do think he is a guy that could step in day one and be a rotation wing (he would not be a starter on the Hawks absent significant trades this off-season, but he could be a top 8 rotation player).  The Hawks could absolutely use a player like this.  I just don't think he will ever be more than a supporting player.

I am still on the Sarr train at #1 (though I don't love him as a prospect), but I think he will have a longer development path than the other options (meaning Clingan and Risacher) and will likely not offer much in year one. The tradeoff obviously is his upside long term.  Difficult needle for the Hawks to thread given the impact of the Murray trade.

I really hope the Hawks make some significant changes this off-season, starting with trading Murray for a better fitting piece.  If it means taking a step back initially in order to take two steps forward later so be it.

[bleachkit]

10 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Pistons fire Monty Williams.

At least we aren't the Pistons. I didn't understand why they gave him that huge deal. He is an okay coach, but was known to have an abrasive personality, and could be impatient with young players. Now they have to pay him 65,000,000 to not coach. 

Edited June 19 by bleachkit

[Afro]

I'm not saying that all of the reports are BS... 

 

But as we get closer and closer to draft day it's important to remember almost all of these guys have gambling angles they're trying to push now. 

 

[deester11]

4 minutes ago, Packfill said:

I agree that the testing did him no favors, and for that reason I would not take him #1 even in this draft.  That said, I do think he is a guy that could step in day one and be a rotation wing (he would not be a starter on the Hawks absent significant trades this off-season, but he could be a top 8 rotation player).  The Hawks could absolutely use a player like this.  I just don't think he will ever be more than a supporting player.

So our best hope is that we draft a long term support player with the number one pick in the draft?  Where do I sign? Lmao.  This is quite a comical outcome if so.

[KB21]

If SA will really offer #4 and our first next year for #1, you take that deal.

[macdaddy]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

If SA will really offer #4 and our first next year for #1, you take that deal.

Who do we take at 4 assuming Sarr,Clingan and Risacher are gone?

[kg01]

14 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

At least we aren't the Pistons. I didn't understand why they gave him that huge deal. He is an okay coach, but was known to have an abrasive personality, and could be impatient with young players. Now they have to pay him 65,000,000 to not coach. 

Just dumb all the way around. 

Just now, KB21 said:

If SA will really offer #4 and our first next year for #1, you take that deal.

Why?  You're forcing yourself to take a guy you thought wasn't good enough to take at 1 so ... why?  That's us doing SAS's bidding, no? 

[bleachkit]

5 minutes ago, KB21 said:

If SA will really offer #4 and our first next year for #1, you take that deal.

Clingan will probably be there at #4, and if he's not can you take Sheppard, who is an incredible shooter. 

[KB21]

I see it as picking up an asset in a stronger draft and still possibly getting the guy you would take at 1 anyway.  Unless someone trades up for him, I can't see Houston taking Clingan.  If they did, then I'd honestly probably just take Reed Sheppard and figure out the fit later.

It's pretty obvious that Bill Duffy is steering Alex Sarr away from Atlanta and to a team where winning isn't a priority yet.