Simple Question: Will the Hawks Start the season OVER OR UNDER the Luxury Tax?

[Final_quest]

25 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

I wanted them to get something done.  Getting credit for allegedly trying hard isn't pro level stuff.   Especially when the target is clearly saying no.  

Pascal Siakam's 'message has been sent' on potential Hawks trade (soaringdownsouth.com)

 

That's sounds really tough and cool. "Only the shots that go in count" alpha talk is so far from reality in my mind.

No one has a 100% success rate on everything they try.

Process and execution done correctly doesn't always achieve the desired goal.  In my professional career we applaud the effort on getting close.  First you have to learn to get someone on the phone, then in a conversation, then into a deal cycle, then close to a commitment, and finally closing the deal. 

Closing deals, especially at the professional level, is not what you're saying.  We always give kudos for getting close to landing a big fish, it means you are learning how to do it.  I don't want to commit my energy to just being a hater for no reason.  I like that they went after Siakam pretty hard.  How many times do you actually get an allstar in a trade?  

[AHF]

10 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

That's sounds really tough and cool. "Only the shots that go in count" alpha talk is so far from reality in my mind.

No one has a 100% success rate on everything they try.

Process and execution done correctly doesn't always achieve the desired goal.  In my professional career we applaud the effort on getting close.  First you have to learn to get someone on the phone, then in a conversation, then into a deal cycle, then close to a commitment, and finally closing the deal. 

Closing deals, especially at the professional level, is not what you're saying.  We always give kudos for getting close to landing a big fish, it means you are learning how to do it.  I don't want to commit my energy to just being a hater for no reason.  I like that they went after Siakam pretty hard.  How many times do you actually get an allstar in a trade?  

I feel like you missed the point.  When you look at drafting, you don't circle a single candidate with your 5th pick and then try to figure out a plan B if that player is off the board at the draft.  You have multiple contingency scenarios ready to go.

So when macdaddy says "get something done" it doesn't mean only "Siakam or bust."  It means pursue your plan for Siakam but have other actions you are ready to take if that gets delayed or reaches a point where it is no longer likely.  Doing nothing is a problem not just because you didn't close the deal but because you didn't pull the trigger on contingency plans.  It appears from the outside to have been "Siakam or bust" as a strategy.  If it wasn't, it means they not only failed on the Siakam trade (which is predictable because those trades are always more likely not to happen) but also failed on every single contingency plan.

[Final_quest]

1 hour ago, AHF said:

I feel like you missed the point.  When you look at drafting, you don't circle a single candidate with your 5th pick and then try to figure out a plan B if that player is off the board at the draft.  You have multiple contingency scenarios ready to go.

So when macdaddy says "get something done" it doesn't mean only "Siakam or bust."  It means pursue your plan for Siakam but have other actions you are ready to take if that gets delayed or reaches a point where it is no longer likely.  Doing nothing is a problem not just because you didn't close the deal but because you didn't pull the trigger on contingency plans.  It appears from the outside to have been "Siakam or bust" as a strategy.  If it wasn't, it means they not only failed on the Siakam trade (which is predictable because those trades are always more likely not to happen) but also failed on every single contingency plan.

Isolating just on the Siakam pursuit, I give them credit for that effort.  Hope they actually land someone this summer.

[macdaddy]

2 hours ago, AHF said:

I feel like you missed the point.  When you look at drafting, you don't circle a single candidate with your 5th pick and then try to figure out a plan B if that player is off the board at the draft.  You have multiple contingency scenarios ready to go.

So when macdaddy says "get something done" it doesn't mean only "Siakam or bust."  It means pursue your plan for Siakam but have other actions you are ready to take if that gets delayed or reaches a point where it is no longer likely.  Doing nothing is a problem not just because you didn't close the deal but because you didn't pull the trigger on contingency plans.  It appears from the outside to have been "Siakam or bust" as a strategy.  If it wasn't, it means they not only failed on the Siakam trade (which is predictable because those trades are always more likely not to happen) but also failed on every single contingency plan.

Yes this was what i was trying to say.  Going into the season with Jalen, who had played less than 100 nba games, as the only PF on the roster told me that they weren't serious about winning this year.   Or they messed something up.  

I get not everything works out.  Sure.  But we're talking about years long ineptitude.  With Trae on a max deal and DJ having tons invested in him and just brought in a high level coach this did not seem like a season to punt to me.  

[Final_quest]

2 hours ago, macdaddy said:

Yes this was what i was trying to say.  Going into the season with Jalen, who had played less than 100 nba games, as the only PF on the roster told me that they weren't serious about winning this year.   Or they messed something up.  

I get not everything works out.  Sure.  But we're talking about years long ineptitude.  With Trae on a max deal and DJ having tons invested in him and just brought in a high level coach this did not seem like a season to punt to me.  

For me that was an awkward pivot from a pretty direct question focused on Siakam deal being close or not.

We’ve talked about this 100 times. 

Point blank question is after they spent 3 years in a row at the tax line, do you both actually believe last year was $10M below because Ressler mandated a spending reduction?  You also believe Siakam was a smoke screen and they weren’t trying to get him?  Like the Siakam ploy was insincere and it was a way to make it seem like they were trying while their true motivation was to “Save Tony’s Money.”  What is your explanation?  

I think they tried to get something done and didn’t like any deal they came across.  They saved the surplus for a possible mid season trade.  

 

[AHF]

Quote

They saved the surplus for a possible mid season trade.  

Then they didn't do a mid season trade and decided to save the surplus for late season cuts.

Then they didn't sign any late season cuts and saved the surplus to pay Vit to be post-season eligible.

Then they decided better to go into the playoffs with a massive hole on the roster and save the surplus in its entirety and call it a day.

 

And thus we ended up with a punted season.

[Final_quest]

7 hours ago, AHF said:

Then they didn't do a mid season trade and decided to save the surplus for late season cuts.

Then they didn't sign any late season cuts and saved the surplus to pay Vit to be post-season eligible.

Then they decided better to go into the playoffs with a massive hole on the roster and save the surplus in its entirety and call it a day.

 

And thus we ended up with a punted season.

Tony owns too much real estate in you guy’s heads.  He’s now instructing his GM to pursue Siakam to create a smoke screen to cover his cheapness?  I can’t get with that level of conspiracy.  

I have no issue with what they did last year, it will help us move forward.  They pursued premium talent only after learning that flippantly giving out big contracts to home grown talent kills your franchise, which is what I said would happen in 2021 if they didn’t trade for a star.  

Tony was aggressive in the three prior years and they ended up with a big mess.  Cutting Collins and going for a premium talent was about the best option available.  

I think they will be aggressive again this year, but the tax is not my barometer.  Like Boston demonstrated.  You assemble a title winning core, then go into the tax to add to it without skipping steps.  

[AHF]

9 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

Tony owns too much real estate in you guy’s heads.  He’s now instructing his GM to pursue Siakam to create a smoke screen to cover his cheapness?  I can’t get with that level of conspiracy.    

Seems like I keep having to repeat myself.  No.  That is not what I’ve said.  At all.

I don’t doubt we legimately putsued Siakam.  My criticism was that deals like a trade for Siakam are unlikely to happen by their nature.  You need to pursue a bunch of them to make one happen or get lucky that things line up on your first try.  Teams can’t rely on this type of low probability trade being the only lever you have to pull.  Adding talent through lower profile trades, through FA, or through trade exceptions needs to be on the table when the alternative is punting a season with your two highest profile players in the primes of their careers.  You need to have a Plan A which can be Siakam but when that isn’t going to happen for months or at all (you can’t come to terms with Toronto, he has signaled he doesn’t want to be in Atlanta, etc) then you move to Plan B, Plan C, etc.

Last season was Plan A or bust.  That isn’t an effective management style when Plan A is a long shot to begin with.  I’ll repeat this as well even though you are aware of it.  We didn’t have to add longterm salary in our Plan B, Plan C, etc.  There are plans that leave the door wide open to add Siakam as well after you’ve done your B or C or D options.  We simply did nothing beyond pursuing Plan A and throwing the season when it didn’t happen.  Whether this is because Ressler wanted a bottom third of the league payroll or not is not the focus for me as much as simply what happened (or more apply didn’t happen) and the consequence of that failure.

[macdaddy]

Point blank question is after they spent 3 years in a row at the tax line, do you both actually believe last year was $10M below because Ressler mandated a spending reduction?  

I believe he mandated not going into the tax.  being that low was because none of their plans worked to add a player

You also believe Siakam was a smoke screen and they weren’t trying to get him?  Like the Siakam ploy was insincere and it was a way to make it seem like they were trying while their true motivation was to “Save Tony’s Money.”  What is your explanation?  

I don't believe it was a smokescreen.  I believe they really wanted him.  I also believe he never intended to come here and it exposed how naive they were to think they could get him in the first place.  They let it consume their whole summer and then i think thought they could get him at the deadline i guess.

 

 

 

[Final_quest]

8 hours ago, AHF said:

Seems like I keep having to repeat myself.  No.  That is not what I’ve said.  At all.

I don’t doubt we legimately putsued Siakam.  My criticism was that deals like a trade for Siakam are unlikely to happen by their nature.  You need to pursue a bunch of them to make one happen or get lucky that things line up on your first try.  Teams can’t rely on this type of low probability trade being the only lever you have to pull.  Adding talent through lower profile trades, through FA, or through trade exceptions needs to be on the table when the alternative is punting a season with your two highest profile players in the primes of their careers.  You need to have a Plan A which can be Siakam but when that isn’t going to happen for months or at all (you can’t come to terms with Toronto, he has signaled he doesn’t want to be in Atlanta, etc) then you move to Plan B, Plan C, etc.

Last season was Plan A or bust.  That isn’t an effective management style when Plan A is a long shot to begin with.  I’ll repeat this as well even though you are aware of it.  We didn’t have to add longterm salary in our Plan B, Plan C, etc.  There are plans that leave the door wide open to add Siakam as well after you’ve done your B or C or D options.  We simply did nothing beyond pursuing Plan A and throwing the season when it didn’t happen.  Whether this is because Ressler wanted a bottom third of the league payroll or not is not the focus for me as much as simply what happened (or more apply didn’t happen) and the consequence of that failure.

I definitely think they flubbed on the Plan A without a solid backup plan.  Anytime it's hard to figure out what went wrong, there's a screw up somewhere.  Ironically it actually worked out to our benefit because we got the #1 overall pick vs an early playoff exit.  Dumb luck.

[sturt]

26 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

Ironically it actually worked out to our benefit because we got the #1 overall pick vs an early playoff exit.  Dumb luck.

It's nice that the basketball gods threw the Hawks a bone.

But the same mastermind that has been doing what he does for 8 years is likely to continue to do what he's done next year.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

Then, he'll be 80. Then, plausibly, Nicky takes over.

 

Yeah, um, basketball gods... you're gonna need quite a few more bones.

 

[macdaddy]

When Lenny took over it gave me hope.  Then we trade Nique but i didn't lose all hope because we still had a good team.  Mookie/Smitty and then Deke.  We were a really good team.  

The Lon Kruger years were just a joke.  Hard to stomach

Woodson/Knight i had some renewed hope because we tore it down and started new with guys like Josh Smith and eventually Joe Johnson.  We had some talent but we had a lot of issues too.  They were entertaining though

Budenholzer after the first couple months I was super excited.  It was type of basketball and a development approach that we had never seen before.  And it paid off quickly.  Then Al left and Bud left and we were in crap town again

But then Trae came in with a bunch of promising young guys and I was super pumped. Trae was my guy and quickly became the second best Atlanta Hawk of all time. 

If Trae is shipped out and DJ or Jalen are the best players on the team then (at my age) I'm pretty pissed.  We'll be irrelevant for years.  It'll take a lot for me to go back to watching every game and following every move.  And it will take a lot to get me in the building.   Now it's possible my disdain lasts just a few weeks but i don't know. 

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

18 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

But then Trae came in with a bunch of promising young guys and I was super pumped. Trae was my guy and quickly became the second best Atlanta Hawk of all time. 

If Trae is shipped out and DJ or Jalen are the best players on the team then (at my age) I'm pretty pissed.  We'll be irrelevant for years.  It'll take a lot for me to go back to watching every game and following every move.  And it will take a lot to get me in the building.   Now it's possible my disdain lasts just a few weeks but i don't know. 

Think about this circle we would create..........traded Luka for Trae and #10 (Reddish) that became a protected 1st from Charlotte that will be 2 2nds that we used in the DJ trade along with 2 of our own picks and a swap for DJ and are planning on following that up by trading Trae for your own 'stuff' back? So the deal eventually ends up being Luka for DJ? Did I get all that? what did I miss?

[sturt]

45 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

Now it's possible my disdain lasts just a few weeks but i don't know. 

You'll be fine. If the implications of the JC trade didn't get you swimming over to this island were I'm at, nothing likely will. APR will always have some version of "hope" to sell you, and it will just be too tempting to give him and his people one more year. Just one more. It's how it tends to work.

And mind you, truth, I can't recall a year when I was more down on one of my sports teams than going into the 2016 Cowboys season. Romo was breaking down, and yet the entire season was going to hinge on his ability to... pun intended... cowboy up. He went down in preseason, decimated by a hit by a Seahawks LB. But what did the football gods do? Unbelievable. They delivered to the team the next Great Hope... the rookie 4th round pick who went into that LA Rams preseason game and turned heads is still the Great Hope.

It happens. When you least expect it, expect it. There is nothing impossible, only things that are highly, highly unlikely when it comes to sports. And one just has to measure for him/herself whether it's worth it. Most can't resist.

Cue the Peter Cetera... hard habit to break. (Well, otoh... not so hard once initially broken, though, honestly.)

 

[macdaddy]

31 minutes ago, sturt said:

You'll be fine. If the implications of the JC trade didn't get you swimming over to this island were I'm at, nothing likely will. APR will always have some version of "hope" to sell you, and it will just be too tempting to give him and his people one more year. Just one more. It's how it tends to work.

And mind you, truth, I can't recall a year when I was more down on one of my sports teams than going into the 2016 Cowboys season. Romo was breaking down, and yet the entire season was going to hinge on his ability to... pun intended... cowboy up. He went down in preseason, decimated by a hit by a Seahawks LB. But what did the football gods do? Unbelievable. They delivered to the team the next Great Hope... the rookie 4th round pick who went into that LA Rams preseason game and turned heads is still the Great Hope.

It happens. When you least expect it, expect it. There is nothing impossible, only things that are highly, highly unlikely when it comes to sports. And one just has to measure for him/herself whether it's worth it. Most can't resist.

Cue the Peter Cetera... hard habit to break. (Well, otoh... not so hard once initially broken, though, honestly.)

 

we'll see.  i could see taking a nice long break while Hawks struggle in mediocrity.  There again i don't think they are dumb enough to trade Trae this year anyway so probably nothing to worry about

 

[Final_quest]

2 hours ago, sturt said:

It's nice that the basketball gods threw the Hawks a bone.

But the same mastermind that has been doing what he does for 8 years is likely to continue to do what he's done next year.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

Then, he'll be 80. Then, plausibly, Nicky takes over.

 

Yeah, um, basketball gods... you're gonna need quite a few more bones.

 

[sturt]

2 hours ago, Final_quest said:

 

1a. When people have substance on their side of a discussion, they use that, because they know that substance is actually persuasive.

1b. When people don't have substance on their side, ad hominem and insult are often the weapons of choice to try to counter the side with the substance. Happens all the time. No, really. All the time.

And that's okay. Nah, it's more than okay. It's its own form of compliment to those of us who stick to substance, in reality. (Thanks!)

 

2a. If the mastermind of the Hawks organization were to have his Saul to Paul conversion tomorrow, all would be forgiven, and I'd be right back here being the pain in the ass to Jay that I've always been and that she adores me for... yes, girl, I know you've missed me.  

2b. I believe that's my line, actually... yes, FQ... yes, Jay.

Let that hate flow.

2c. I was a distant second, at best, at perceiving the nefarious tendencies of the Hawks owner. Indeed, there was a long while when I was regularly disputing with that first person the proposition that we should not be so satisfied as to presume the best of him.

That first?

Shouldn't surprise. As far as I'm aware, there's been no change in her conclusions about the Hawks owner, though it's very plausible she's looked for ways to try to delineate herself from the guy who followed her down this path... it's really hard on her, I'm sure, to think she's the reason I ever began to scrutinize APR to begin with... well, other than the man's words and behaviors, of course.

 

[sturt]

16 hours ago, macdaddy said:

i could see taking a nice long break while Hawks struggle in mediocrity.

Yes, that's precisely what I'm doing.

That break ends if/when the mastermind either has a come-to-Jesus experience... seems terribly unlikely, but who knows... or the mastermind sells to someone who doesn't impose on the franchise these additional obstacles to winning a title... seems terribly unlikely, but who knows.

In the meantime, I've all this time to invest in other more productive, more fulfilling ways, and it's cool.

[Final_quest]

On 6/20/2024 at 4:15 PM, sturt said:

It's nice that the basketball gods threw the Hawks a bone.

But the same mastermind that has been doing what he does for 8 years is likely to continue to do what he's done next year.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

And the year after that.

Then, he'll be 80. Then, plausibly, Nicky takes over.

 

Yeah, um, basketball gods... you're gonna need quite a few more bones.

 

You call this substance?  It seems more like a rant.

[sturt]

55 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

You call this substance?  It seems more like a rant.

Two points.

1. Absolutely it is substance. It is expressing the point, perhaps taking some creative license but a point nonetheless, that sure you may be enjoying one year where the basketball gods smiled, but then the very same prime mover cause of that admittedly-pleasant irony will still be there next year... and the year after, and the year after, and the year after, etc... and so just how many years are we smart to anticipate that there will be some good something to come from someone whose paradigms have been exposed to be what they are?

2. It sure as hell isn't ad hominem or insult.

No, three.

3. I'm sure it's received like fingernails on a chalkboard based on your well-established posture where any of that is concerned... but while you're entitled to your opinion, you don't get to re-write the dictionary to accommodate your preferred perspective. In other words, it's only a "rant" to the degree that the reader doesn't like the message being conveyed. And that's not a me problem.