2024 Hawks Offseason Thread: Draft Over: What's Next?

[terrell]

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

 

52 mill a year for BI?

 

[REHawksFan]

4 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

 

Hawks better not either should a trade happen. 

[AHF]

10 hours ago, REHawksFan said:

Hawks better not either should a trade happen. 

If the Hawks aren't willing to pay him, probably better off not trading for him.  He is going to want the max and will probably take the highest offer from any team willing to make it.

[Dnice]

If no Ingram, who's next? 

[NBASupes]

9 minutes ago, Dnice said:

If no Ingram, who's next? 

Ingram was never a guarantee but a strong possibility. Atlanta has a lot of options. 

But Garland is someone also on the market and while some teams prefer Murray. Some prefer Garland. 

[capstone21]

13 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

CC for Lu Dort.

I would do that but he is their defensive anchor

[NBASupes]

The big news I found out recently is BI + NO 1st round picks is be rumored to be heading to Cleveland to play with Mitchell for Allen and filler. Also, Cleveland is targeting Clingan and Keldon Johnson for Garland once Mitchell resigns which they strongly believe will happen.

Seems like Cleveland is building a new cast around Mitchell. Struss also seems to be the PG of the future there if Mitchell stays. 

While it may seem like we got jumped. Murray has a ton of interest around the league. I just don't know if the value is massive. It's more about the teams interested than anything. Murray has way more suitors than Garland. 

[BangHolman]

We're just going to continue sucking for the next decade plus.

[REHawksFan]

25 minutes ago, AHF said:

If the Hawks aren't willing to pay him, probably better off not trading for him.  He is going to want the max and will probably take the highest offer from any team willing to make it.

I can see the logic in that, but trading for him and Daniels does provide the Hawks with some benefit.  

1. We'd get a year with Ingram to see how he fit and he's a clear upgrade from Hunter

2. I assume we'd have his bird rights so we could offer him the most which could be beneficial in a s-n-t scenario

3. It's at least possible that Ingram and the Hawks fit really well together and they both want him to stay long term so they negotiate a reasonable deal

4. Daniels would be the long term player we would be adding in the trade which is a type of player we really need, so if the trade ended up being DJM and Clint for one year of BI plus DD long term plus either the 21st Pick or the LAL '25 Pick, I'd be ok with that.  Wouldn't love it, but after the rumors of DJM trades at the deadline that were full of crap players, I'd take it.  At least this trade gives the Hawks a long term POA defender and a pick. And if BI walks, we'd have the potential for a sign n trade.  

[shakes]

4 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

Struss also seems to be the PG of the future there if Mitchell stays. 

 

[KB21]

Hmmm.

[AHF]

6 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

I can see the logic in that, but trading for him and Daniels does provide the Hawks with some benefit.  

1. We'd get a year with Ingram to see how he fit and he's a clear upgrade from Hunter

2. I assume we'd have his bird rights so we could offer him the most which could be beneficial in a s-n-t scenario

3. It's at least possible that Ingram and the Hawks fit really well together and they both want him to stay long term so they negotiate a reasonable deal

4. Daniels would be the long term player we would be adding in the trade which is a type of player we really need, so if the trade ended up being DJM and Clint for one year of BI plus DD long term plus either the 21st Pick or the LAL '25 Pick, I'd be ok with that.  Wouldn't love it, but after the rumors of DJM trades at the deadline that were full of crap players, I'd take it.  At least this trade gives the Hawks a long term POA defender and a pick. And if BI walks, we'd have the potential for a sign n trade.  

I think the trade assets need to be balanced around these objectives.  Bird rights are only beneficial in that we could sign him without needing the cap space.  If we are going to Bird rights to pay him more, I am pretty confident he will be a toxic contract.  The idea of using next season to see how Ingram and Trae work together makes sense.  I have my own doubts about the fit with Ingram's fixation on midrange jumpers but it can't be a worse fit than DJM and Trae (low bar).  I place very low value on the return in a S&T for BI.  Maybe the matching salary could be good players but I think it is equally likely that it is overpaid guys and a second round pick coming back.

The main question for me is that I assume it would take DJM to make this trade happen both for salary matching reasons and for value.  If we end up with only Daniels, was that the best outcome for a DJM trade?

21 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

The big news I found out recently is BI + NO 1st round picks is be rumored to be heading to Cleveland to play with Mitchell for Allen and filler.

What is coming back to NO?  I don't view BI as a dump deal where NO needs to attach a pick to get the deal done.  I assume Garland is coming back along with some other salary?

[AtLaS]

16 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

I can see the logic in that, but trading for him and Daniels does provide the Hawks with some benefit.  

1. We'd get a year with Ingram to see how he fit and he's a clear upgrade from Hunter

2. I assume we'd have his bird rights so we could offer him the most which could be beneficial in a s-n-t scenario

3. It's at least possible that Ingram and the Hawks fit really well together and they both want him to stay long term so they negotiate a reasonable deal

4. Daniels would be the long term player we would be adding in the trade which is a type of player we really need, so if the trade ended up being DJM and Clint for one year of BI plus DD long term plus either the 21st Pick or the LAL '25 Pick, I'd be ok with that.  Wouldn't love it, but after the rumors of DJM trades at the deadline that were full of crap players, I'd take it.  At least this trade gives the Hawks a long term POA defender and a pick. And if BI walks, we'd have the potential for a sign n trade.  

I don't like Daniels at all.  He can't shoot and is only a 61% FT shooter.  He is going to have to drastically improve his shooting.  When you are that bad at the FT line it rarely improves significantly enough and even rarer to become a respectable 3pt shooter.  Not saying it's impossible but very unlikely.

Without being able to shoot he is Matisse Thybulle or Andre Roberson.  You're playing 4 on 5 on offense.  Everyone else has to be elite around them.

[NBASupes]

3 minutes ago, AHF said:

I think the trade assets need to be balanced around these objectives.  Bird rights are only beneficial in that we could sign him without needing the cap space.  If we are going to Bird rights to pay him more, I am pretty confident he will be a toxic contract.  The idea of using next season to see how Ingram and Trae work together makes sense.  I have my own doubts about the fit with Ingram's fixation on midrange jumpers but it can't be a worse fit than DJM and Trae (low bar).  I place very low value on the return in a S&T for BI.  Maybe the matching salary could be good players but I think it is equally likely that it is overpaid guys and a second round pick coming back.

The main question for me is that I assume it would take DJM to make this trade happen both for salary matching reasons and for value.  If we end up with only Daniels, was that the best outcome for a DJM trade?

What is coming back to NO?  I don't view BI as a dump deal where NO needs to attach a pick to get the deal done.  I assume Garland is coming back along with some other salary?

Jarrett Allen and salary filler

[AHF]

5 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

Jarrett Allen and salary filler

Sorry I misread your post.

Not sure why NO would need to attach a pick in that case.  If they have to attach a first round pick to swap Ingram for Allen then I think that says to me very loudly that Ingram is viewed as empty scoring around the league. 

[NBASupes]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

Sorry I misread your post.

Not sure why NO would need to attach a pick in that case.  If they have to attach a first round pick to swap Ingram for Allen then I think that says to me very loudly that Ingram is viewed as empty scoring around the league. 

Salary reasons. 

BI has one year and Allen has two. 

[AHF]

2 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

Salary reasons. 

BI has one year and Allen has two. 

I'm just saying I'm not sure how many first round pick Allen is worth by himself.  Ingram being included speaks loudly to me about his value right now as a pending UFA.  

It also says to me that DJM should be worth a lot more than Ingram for those same salary reasons.

[NBASupes]

1 minute ago, AHF said:

I'm just saying I'm not sure how many first round pick Allen is worth by himself.  Ingram being included speaks loudly to me about his value right now as a pending UFA.  

It also says to me that DJM should be worth a lot more than Ingram for those same salary reasons.

I believe these are projected 20-30 range picks. The Lakers pick is not available 

Edited May 20 by NBASupes

[kg01]

14 hours ago, terrell said:

52 mill a year for BI 

Yeah that's ... BullshIt.. 

[NekiEcko]

It is kind of surprising that NO will do that, but they need a big and guard as well.  Maybe Garland goes there or SA?  But that means what are we going to do about Murray then?  I can see why that most folks are saying that Trae/Murray is not going anywhere this offseason.

Edited May 20 by NekiEcko