2024 Summer League Roster and Games.

[JeffS17]

5 minutes ago, AHF said:

And yet Milwaukee got that first from Minnesota despite the fact that they would have taken Allen and we gave up value to Miami when they probably would not have taken Nikola.  Your view that teams never bluff like this does not align with reality.  At all.

You don't have to actually intend to do something to have leverage.  You need the other person to believe that it is likely enough to happen that they are willing to give something up to avoid the risk that their target gets picked.  This happens all the time not just in basketball negotiations but in real world negotiations as well.  Customers get price downs from suppliers because the salesman is afraid the customer will resource to a competitor even if the customer has no intention of doing so.  A realtor gets more for a house by convincing the buyer that someone else is about to buy the house for more.  This happens even when there is no such competitor or person prepared to buy the house. This is basic negotiating.  You only look like a goon if you aren't a good negotiator which should not be a big problem with a good GM.

Of course, goes both ways though.  For instance, the Wiz could have led everyone to believe they wanted Sarr, and then we trade down with them to recoup some free assets, assuming we will get our guy, and they steal our guy from us.  That's a hefty risk to take and something you should need to weigh if your perspective is the real politik smoke and mirrors game.  Now what do you do, sitting at #2 with Risacher off the board, and you don't want Sarr because he has attitude and motor issues, the next best player is redundant with your star PG and will certainly having him ask out.  Take Clingan?  Not sure anyone was really that sold on Clingan. 

I'll never blame Landry for not doing deals that were never on the table, or ones that presume a level of incompetence from opposing GMs.  Our draft pick needed to be more prescriptive than a team preparing for a long rebuild like the Wiz.  It's very easy to put yourself in Schlenk's shoes and have zero reason to give up additional assets to move up one slot, so I highly doubt that was ever an option for us.

[AHF]

6 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

I'll never blame Landry for not doing deals that were never on the table, or ones that presume a level of incompetence from opposing GMs.  Our draft pick needed to be more prescriptive than a team preparing for a long rebuild like the Wiz.  It's very easy to put yourself in Schlenk's shoes and have zero reason to give up additional assets to move up one slot, so I highly doubt that was ever an option for us.

I will always reserve the right to blame him for not doing deals that were on the table or ones that a competent GM could pull off without much difficulty.  There is a reason that in the same draft that (a) we extracted nothing for the #1 overall pick when it was widely known that Washington was all-in on Sarr and we couldn't get them to fear they might lose him and (b) we gave up consideration ourselves to move up from #44 to #43 because we were afraid our guy would be gone.  Some GMs know how to work the game and some don't.  Same reason we gave up 3 unprotected picks when we traded for DJM and accepted a double protection on a pick and a toxic asset when we traded DJM.  Some GMs are shrewd negotiators and tilt the table in their favor and others are the guys who get taken advantage of.  All the evidence points to our GM being in the latter category to me.

[JeffS17]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

there is a reason in the same draft that we (a) extracted nothing for the #1 overall pick because we couldn't create fear in another GM

We extracted the most valuable player in the draft class lmao

For the rest of your assessment, there's a big difference trading literal trash salary to a team for a very good player and trading a very good player for high potential young player and a rotation piece.  Of course the pick number and protections varied significantly 

[AHF]

5 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

We extracted the most valuable player in the draft class lmao

I hope that is right.  Time will tell.  We could have still taken him at #2 and had him at a lower price with another asset to boot is the point.  He doesn't become a less valuable player in that scenario.  He is actually more valuable.

Quote

For the rest of your assessment, there's a big difference trading literal trash salary to a team for a very good player and trading a very good player for high potential young player and a rotation piece.  Of course the pick number and protections varied significantly 

Right.  We overpaid for DJM when we acquired him due to not including any protections.  We took it in the shorts when we traded DJM by agreeing to take on trash salary to help NO but not getting them to combine the trade with JV to avoid this consequence and then by allowing them to add double pick protect one of the few assets we got back for DJM.  Buying high and selling low is a bad habit.  Fields needs to break it.  (AJ was another sell low deal caused by holding him despite the coach not believing in him coming into last season which seemed to be the case given Quin's use of AJ after he came on board.)

[JeffS17]

1 minute ago, AHF said:

I hope that is right.  Time will tell.  We could have still taken him at #2 and had him at a lower price with another asset to boot is the point.  He doesn't become a less valuable player in that scenario.  He is actually more valuable.

And if Washington trades up to rug sweep us and take Risacher? Now what? You conveniently ignore that option despite your insistence good GMs make these types of savvy moves.

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

Right.  We overpaid for DJM when we acquired him due to not including any protections.  We took it in the shorts when we traded DJM by agreeing to take on trash salary to help NO but not getting them to combine the trade with JV to avoid this consequence and then by allowing them to add double pick protect one of the few assets we got back for DJM.  Buying high and selling low is a bad habit.  Fields needs to break it.  (AJ was another sell low deal caused by holding him despite the coach not believing in him coming into last season which seemed to be the case given Quin's use of AJ after he came on board.)

You're the only one that thinks "we took it in the shorts" by the way.  Pretty much all the neutral media outlets (that are typically anti-Hawks I'll add) are praising this deal.  The Lakers pick is quite valuable -- it's rare to get a valuable unprotected pick from a third party team in deals like this (good job Landry!).  Generally teams get picks from the team they just made better.  We nailed the trade that was crucial for this offseason.

[ATLHawks3]

I know it’s Summer League, but Alex Sarr has been terrible offensively in Las Vegas. 

[terrell]

1 minute ago, ATLHawks3 said:

I know it’s Summer League, but Alex Sarr has been terrible offensively in Las Vegas. 

Yeah he looks bad.. 0-11? Wth

 

[ATLHawks3]

Clingan has been as advertised so far.

[ATLHawks3]

Just as I say that, he hits a three, lol.

[theheroatl]

3 minutes ago, terrell said:

Yeah he looks bad.. 0-11? Wth

 

I started having big issues watching his whole games for the periods where he seemed confused on his true role 

 

that’s about the time I put Reed and Risacher at the top of my list.

Edited July 17 by theheroatl

[Hawkmoor]

5 hours ago, AHF said:

I hope that is right.  Time will tell.  We could have still taken him at #2 and had him at a lower price with another asset to boot is the point.  He doesn't become a less valuable player in that scenario.  He is actually more valuable.

I say the odds are you are correct.  In fact I believe its gonna be looked at eventually as a waaay overpay.  Its not enough for where he was drafted at.  You got players below him that look as good or better.

[Hawkmoor]

5 hours ago, AHF said:

Right.  We overpaid for DJM when we acquired him due to not including any protections.  We took it in the shorts when we traded DJM by agreeing to take on trash salary to help NO but not getting them to combine the trade with JV to avoid this consequence and then by allowing them to add double pick protect one of the few assets we got back for DJM.  Buying high and selling low is a bad habit.  Fields needs to break it.  (AJ was another sell low deal caused by holding him despite the coach not believing in him coming into last season which seemed to be the case given Quin's use of AJ after he came on board.)

Don't forget holding on to John Collins too long and getting nothing.

[Hawkmoor]

5 hours ago, AHF said:

I will always reserve the right to blame him for not doing deals that were on the table or ones that a competent GM could pull off without much difficulty.  There is a reason that in the same draft that (a) we extracted nothing for the #1 overall pick when it was widely known that Washington was all-in on Sarr and we couldn't get them to fear they might lose him and (b) we gave up consideration ourselves to move up from #44 to #43 because we were afraid our guy would be gone.  Some GMs know how to work the game and some don't.  Same reason we gave up 3 unprotected picks when we traded for DJM and accepted a double protection on a pick and a toxic asset when we traded DJM.  Some GMs are shrewd negotiators and tilt the table in their favor and others are the guys who get taken advantage of.  All the evidence points to our GM being in the latter category to me.

I totally agree. I want to like what the Hawks are doing.  So much so that occassionally I will foolishly endorse what they are doing like I did a couple of days ago when I endorsed the Risacher pick.  I did so because he proved he can play but like you said, its hards to overlook that its a overpay because the Hawks were supposed to be dealing from a position of leverage.  They acted like they snapped up the guy that everybody wanted with that whooping and hollering in the draft room while other teams were sitting back happy that they could get their guy WITHOUT dealing with the Hawks.

Edited July 17 by Hawkmoor

[ATLHawks3]

I really like wish we could’ve traded back into the draft and gotten Clingan. He’s gonna make an impact immediately.

[ShayD]

Clingan is very good. Just ignore the shooting %, his impact in other areas is very high.

[Final_quest]

24 minutes ago, terrell said:

Yeah he looks bad.. 0-11? Wth

 

0-15!  No one saw this coming….  Anybody watch this one?  

[ShayD]

1 minute ago, ShayD said:

Clingan is very good. Just ignore the shooting %, his impact in other areas is very high.

He is as good as current Capela with soo much better passing feel.

[JeffS17]

38 minutes ago, theheroatl said:

I started having big issues watching his whole games for the periods where he seemed confused on his true role 

 

that’s about the time I put Reed and Risacher at the top of my list.

Same, he had a very good marketing blast to build hype, but when I watched him play (not just highlights), he really doesnt like doing big man things.  And he doesnt have intangibles that impact winning imo

[ATLHawks3]

Sarr needs to learn how to sets screens, roll to the rim, and catch lobs. He's going to be a bust if he thinks he can be a 7'1 perimeter player only. 

Edited July 17 by ATLHawks3

[Final_quest]

15 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

Same, he had a very good marketing blast to build hype, but when I watched him play (not just highlights), he really doesnt like doing big man things.  And he doesnt have intangibles that impact winning imo

Surely people were not reacting to his highlight clips… Well, at least we didn’t pick him.