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

[KB21]

 

[AHF]

31 minutes ago, parfait said:

And many of us would like a backup to OO that is a true 7 footer, ideally one without hands of stone. 

When you look at the old style bigs, you can see why perhaps Snyder would want this.  Examples:

Andre Drummond 2023-24

+/- of +4.8 (team was ~4.4 points better on offense per 100 possessions when Drummond was on the floor; ~0.4 point better on defense per 100 possessions)

H2H Net Rating:  +6.2 (Drummond's rating was 6.2 points better than the man he was guarding)

Team Net Rating +/- of +3.6 (team was 1.00 better than the opponent with him on the floor and -2.6 worse when he was off the floor)

Clutch Stats: +42 (team was 42 points better with Drummond with fewer than 5 minutes left in the game when the game was within 5 points)

Andre Drummond of the Chicago Bulls, NBA player stats (82games.com)

 

Ivica Zubac 2023-24

+/- of +2.9 (team was 1.0 point worse on offense per 100 possessions when Ivica was on the floor; 3.9 points better on defense per 100 possessions)

H2H Net Rating:  +1.8 (Ivica's rating was 1.8 points better than the man he was guarding)

Team Net Rating +/- of +3.0 (team was 4.9 better than the opponent with him on the floor and 1.9 better when he was off the floor)

Clutch Stats: +22 (team was 22 points better with Ivica on the floor with fewer than 5 minutes left in the game when the game was within 5 points)

Ivica Zubac of the Los Angeles Clippers, NBA player stats (82games.com)

 

Jaren Jackson Jr. 2023-24

+/- of -1.8 (team was 1 point better on offense per 100 possessions and 2.6 points worse on defense when JJJ was on the floor)

H2H Net Rating: -0.7 (JJJ's rating was -0.7 points worse than the man he was guarding)

Team Net Rating +/- of -1.5 (team was -7.7 worse than the opponent when he was on the floor and -6.2 worse when he was off the floor)

Clutch Stats:  0 (team was no better or worse than opponents with JJJ on the floor with fewer than 5 minutes left in the game when the game was within 5 points)

Jaren Jackson Jr. of the Memphis Grizzlies, NBA player stats (82games.com)

 

JJJ is the best of these players and has had much better numbers playing next to Steven Adams the last two seasons.  But there are some very positive metrics for some of these larger, less mobile, and less switchable bigs.

[bird_dirt]

4 hours ago, KB21 said:

It should be patently clear that Snyder wants to be varied on defense, because he asked Clint to do a lot of stuff he can't do.  The reliance on Clint is a flaw that most coaches have.  Snyder just favored the vet over the young player who had has shitty player development during his early career.  It's very clear that Snyder doesn't want to be drop only on defense though, and that was changing even in Utah when his drop only scheme was getting exposed in the playoffs.  

But let's continue to push this bullshit narrative that OO is too small just like we did when Al Horford was too small.  

This is the second time recently you’ve brought up “people” saying Horford was too small to play center as if that those “people” were wrong for saying that. 

Anyone pushing that agenda when he was here was 100% following what Horford himself said. He said he couldn’t continue to play center (especially after his second pectoral tear). He drove that narrative begging us to sign a C so he could move to PF. 
Then that trick turned tale and signed with the Cs when we did sign a C per his request. 

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, bird_dirt said:

This is the second time recently you’ve brought up “people” saying Horford was too small to play center as if that those “people” were wrong for saying that. 

Anyone pushing that agenda when he was here was 100% following what Horford himself said. He said he couldn’t continue to play center (especially after his second pectoral tear). He drove that narrative begging us to sign a C so he could move to PF. 
Then that trick turned tale and signed with the Cs when we did sign a C per his request. 

They were absolutely wrong. 100%.  It's incontrovertible that they were wrong.  

[bird_dirt]

14 minutes ago, KB21 said:

They were absolutely wrong. 100%.  It's incontrovertible that they were wrong.  

But what’s right today is irrelevant to what was right then. 
Dude had two freak pec tears and said he shouldn’t be a C. That was enough to agree with him at the time. NO ONE was questioning it at all.
And if the Hawks said, “you’re wrong, you can play C” then he was going to leave. 
It’s just a shame he was a little b**** and left anyway and ended up playing C for another team. F that dude. 

[KB21]

7 minutes ago, bird_dirt said:

But what’s right today is irrelevant to what was right then. 
Dude had two freak pec tears and said he shouldn’t be a C. That was enough to agree with him at the time. NO ONE was questioning it at all.
And if the Hawks said, “you’re wrong, you can play C” then he was going to leave. 
It’s just a shame he was a little b**** and left anyway and ended up playing C for another team. F that dude. 

Even at that time it was an antiquated view to pigeonhole him as a power forward only because of his size.  The game was in the early stages of changing even then, and Al under Bud marked the new era for NBA bigs with the way Bud utilized him.  

[macdaddy]

57 minutes ago, bird_dirt said:

This is the second time recently you’ve brought up “people” saying Horford was too small to play center as if that those “people” were wrong for saying that. 

Anyone pushing that agenda when he was here was 100% following what Horford himself said. He said he couldn’t continue to play center (especially after his second pectoral tear). He drove that narrative begging us to sign a C so he could move to PF. 
Then that trick turned tale and signed with the Cs when we did sign a C per his request. 

Yeah he never ended up being a 4.  He was too valuable at the 5.  He just never believed it until he left atlanta.   Sometimes i hate our franchise.  We have nothing to hang our hat on other than Nique. 

[AtLaS]

The more I think about it, I'm open to trading DJM for future picks.  This then opens up potential trade partners to any team.  If we are trying to trade Murray straight up for an equal talent at a position of need, it severely limits our potential trade partners which is why Ingram is the rumored deal.  You have to find a team that needs a PG, that also has a good wing of similar talent that they'd be willing to part with.  

Most teams looking to add a Murray level player, want to compete and don't want to give back equal talent at a different position b/c that would create a hole on their roster.  They'd rather trade picks, which we could use to enter the Bridges sweepstakes or something similar.

Edited May 23 by AtLaS

[Final_quest]

17 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

The more I think about it, I'm open to trading DJM for future picks.  This then opens up potential trade partners to any team.  If we are trying to trade Murray straight up for an equal talent at a position of need, it severely limits our potential trade partners which is why Ingram is the rumored deal.  You have to find a team that needs a PG, that also has a good wing of similar talent that they'd be willing to part with.  

Most teams looking to add a Murray level player, want to compete and don't want to give back equal talent at a different position b/c that would create a hole on their roster.  They'd rather trade picks, which we could use to enter the Bridges sweepstakes or something similar.

Brad Rowland said he had not heard of any good trades for Murray yet.  It’s hard to swap same caliber player to player.  

[ATLHawks3]

5 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I don't think he's 12...more like 16.  Look at the rest of those other kids, they also don't look 12.

He's 12 years old: https://www.euroleaguebasketball.net/en/ngt/players/mohamed-dabone/013155/

[Jody23]

7 hours ago, KB21 said:

 

12 years old!?

[JTB]

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/40205611/bronny-james-attracting-fan-wagers-no-1-pick-nba-draft
 

I wish they would!…I’d no longer be a fan that day, that’s for damn sure!

[JTB]

9 hours ago, AtLaS said:

The more I think about it, I'm open to trading DJM for future picks.  This then opens up potential trade partners to any team.  If we are trying to trade Murray straight up for an equal talent at a position of need, it severely limits our potential trade partners which is why Ingram is the rumored deal.  You have to find a team that needs a PG, that also has a good wing of similar talent that they'd be willing to part with.  

Most teams looking to add a Murray level player, want to compete and don't want to give back equal talent at a different position b/c that would create a hole on their roster.  They'd rather trade picks, which we could use to enter the Bridges sweepstakes or something similar.

I like the idea of trading Murray for the spurs 4th or 8th pick and keeping our first pick.

Lets address our big man issues in a draft where teams are looking to get out of the lottery due to the so call weak draft class.

#1 - Draft Sarr

#4 - Draft Clingan (If this is the pick Spurs trade to us in a Murray deal)

or 

#8 - Draft Edey (if this is the pick the Spurs trade to us in a Murray deal)

[Spud2nique]

2 hours ago, JTB said:

I like the idea of trading Murray for the spurs 4th or 8th pick and keeping our first pick.

Lets address our big man issues in a draft where teams are looking to get out of the lottery due to the so call weak draft class.

#1 - Draft Sarr

#4 - Draft Clingan (If this is the pick Spurs trade to us in a Murray deal)

or 

#8 - Draft Edey (if this is the pick the Spurs trade to us in a Murray deal)

You’ve been around long enough to know no team in NBA history has ever had 3 picks in the top 8. 
 

Ya, no. This is not gonna happen.

 

[Final_quest]

10 minutes ago, Spud2nique said:

You’ve been around long enough to know no team in NBA history has ever had 3 picks in the top 8. 
 

Ya, no. This is not gonna happen.

 

Think he means Sarr + Clingan or Edey.  

We trade Murray for one of the Spurs picks, not both.

[KB21]

3 hours ago, JTB said:

I like the idea of trading Murray for the spurs 4th or 8th pick and keeping our first pick.

Lets address our big man issues in a draft where teams are looking to get out of the lottery due to the so call weak draft class.

#1 - Draft Sarr

#4 - Draft Clingan (If this is the pick Spurs trade to us in a Murray deal)

or 

#8 - Draft Edey (if this is the pick the Spurs trade to us in a Murray deal)

[JTB]

4 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

You’ve been around long enough to know no team in NBA history has ever had 3 picks in the top 8. 
 

Ya, no. This is not gonna happen.

 

I’m not talking about 3 picks in the top 8. I’m talking about 2 picks in the top 8. We trade Murray to get Spurs #4 pick OR #8 pick.

 

i think this is the draft to double dip in , in the lottery like we did with Hunter and Reddish .

[AHF]

2 minutes ago, JTB said:

i think this is the draft to double dip in , in the lottery like we did with Hunter and Reddish .

Why?  I think double dipping with Hunter and Reddish turned out to be a failure.  It seems like you would want to double dip in strong drafts more than weak ones so double dipping in next year's draft would be a much better idea than this one.

[JTB]

4 minutes ago, AHF said:

Why?  I think double dipping with Hunter and Reddish turned out to be a failure.  It seems like you would want to double dip in strong drafts more than weak ones so double dipping in next year's draft would be a much better idea than this one.

The chances of double dipping in a strong draft will never happen. But if our FO is higher on certain prospects than others we should definitely look to get one of the spurs picks.

I personally see no issues with drafting Sarr at #1 then trading Murray to get our center of the future . To me the draft class is weak as a whole but there are about 4-6 prospects I really like for the hawks.

Sarr + Clingan or Edey would be a dream come true! No way Trae would leave that on the table.

[theheroatl]

10 minutes ago, AHF said:

Why?  I think double dipping with Hunter and Reddish turned out to be a failure.  It seems like you would want to double dip in strong drafts more than weak ones so double dipping in next year's draft would be a much better idea than this one.

We absolutely do not need to double dip this draft UNLESS it is for a combo like Sarr & Sheppard or Sarr and Castle

 

That is pretty much the only combo I would want