2024-25 Insider Thread

[AtLaS]

Hunter isn't overpaid.  That narrative needs to stop.  Just look at what other players are getting.  A year from now his contract will look even better, in 2 years it will be better.  OG just got 43 FKN million max, his stats are nearly identical to Hunter.  Sure he is better than Hunter, but not by that much.  People only think that because he was on a playoff team that made noise this year.  That was a terrible deal for NYK, period.

Anyone who says Hunter is overpaid is only looking at the Hawks roster and not looking at the Macro view of the NBA as a whole.  

[macdaddy]

Nance will be fine as a backup 4.  Way better than what we had last year which was nothing.   I'm going to take him over the hope of a gleague guy stepping up.  

Got to be some moves coming.  Our roster is just jacked up right now.  We've got some nice pieces but we aren't there yet in talent or balance. 

 

I don't think Hunter is overpaid necessarily but it still begs the question of why can't we move him. 

[Final_quest]

36 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

We did not start the season over the tax line in any of those years.

When I say start the season I'm talking about offseason.  Before we cut Collins we were way over the luxury tax line. 

[RedDawg#8]

14 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

Got to be some moves coming.  Our roster is just jacked up right now.  We've got some nice pieces but we aren't there yet in talent or balance. 

We were equally jacked up last season and our front office just sat on their hands and waited it out while we watch our team struggle. No PF after Jalen went down with a TPE available and we said, nah, we good.

[AHF]

7 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

When I say start the season I'm talking about offseason.  Before we cut Collins we were way over the luxury tax line. 

We were $5.4M over the line before the trade and $8.8 under the line after the trade.  I'm not sure I would classify that as "way over" but it definitely moved us from a tax paying position to under the line.

[Final_quest]

36 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

We did not start the season over the tax line in any of those years.

When I say start the season I'm talking about offseason.  Before we cut Collins we were way over the luxury tax line. 

 

36 minutes ago, Afro said:

Im not sure there is a whole lot of evidence for that? Like it's definitely a nice soundbite, but isn't overly realistic. 

Non-Star players that signed for 15+ million this offseason. 

Patrick Williams

KCP

Tobias

Obi Toppin

Hartenstein

OG

Isaac

Monk

Quickley

There's probably a few more but I'm also not including any of the rookies that got max extensions, cause that's TBD. 

This offseason spending is going exactly how it usually does. "Well rounded" wings are mostly getting 15-25 million. The vets with limitations are getting the MLE. 

There are a few on my list that are better than Hunter....but are making more than Hunter. KCP is the only exception to that. 

 

This whole "Hunter is vastly overpaid" argument that I see around here is not supported by anything. Patrick Williams just signed for 90 mill without a single season of above 10ppg. Breaking News: decent starting wings cost money lol. I'm not a Hunter fan, but y'all act like hes an absolute bum that should be making somewhere near what Slo-Mo does? That's not anywhere close to realistic. 

 

Hunter can prove he's not overpaid at any point by getting an offer to reflect he represents a value contract.  I don't think the league sees him that way.  Do you? 

There are gonna be signings above the MLE for role players, of course.  Largely those players are getting squeezed, or will be increasingly more squeezed. But Hunter is not on OG's level, right?  

All of this ignores the question of does Quin want to commit to Hunter?  Do you think he sees him as a starter or future 6th man?  I don't. So that makes him even more of an overpay because we are compromising our play style fit for him.  

[Final_quest]

 

1 hour ago, AHF said:

At some point, having cap space is meaningless unless you are filling it with quality players.  

At some point, committing big salaries to players you don't want long term and starting every offseason with no flexibility ruins your team.  

[AtLaS]

2 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

When I say start the season I'm talking about offseason.  Before we cut Collins we were way over the luxury tax line. 

 

Hunter can prove he's not overpaid at any point by getting an offer to reflect he represents a value contract.  I don't think the league sees him that way.  Do you? 

There are gonna be signings above the MLE for role players, of course.  Largely those players are getting squeezed, or will be increasingly more squeezed. But Hunter is not on OG's level, right?  

All of this ignores the question of does Quin want to commit to Hunter?  Do you think he sees him as a starter or future 6th man?  I don't. So that makes him even more of an overpay because we are compromising our play style fit for him.  

Isn't the rumor a 1st round pick and productive player for Hunter?  How is that not value?  Teams don't offer a 1st to take on a bad contract.  It's usually the other way around.  

[AHF]

Just now, Final_quest said:

 

At some point, committing big salaries to players you don't want long term and starting every offseason with no flexibility ruins your team.  

We are already past that point with the cutting we've done.  We have flexibility to make moves right now and next offseason just Nance and CC alone will be $34M coming off the books giving us significant flexibility.  Moving Hunter for Williams opens up ~$8M more space.  What do you do with that space this year?  Probably nothing.  Probably just take it to the bank like the $10M we could have used last season but didn't.  So what do we do with the salary differential it the next two offseasons?  What can we do because we have Williams on the roster and don't have Hunter that we couldn't have done if we hadn't made the trade?  That is the real question.

Just having restructured the NO deal to combine it with the Jonas trade would have freed up Zeller's salary and roster spot so if you want an easy return on flexibility that would have been a good place to start.

[Final_quest]

5 minutes ago, AHF said:

We were $5.4M over the line before the trade and $8.8 under the line after the trade.  I'm not sure I would classify that as "way over" but it definitely moved us from a tax paying position to under the line.

Does that include capholds?  The point remains whether you want to call it starting every offseason slightly over or way over, it's a similar problem.  You are expenses heavy and talent poor. 

The person who takes the hacksaw to the out of control budget is never appreciated.  You can't improve your roster without making painful cuts and taking some risks. 

Do you believe Quin has bought into Hunter?  I don't.   

[AHF]

4 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

Isn't the rumor a 1st round pick and productive player for Hunter?  How is that not value?  Teams don't offer a 1st to take on a bad contract.  It's usually the other way around.  

That is value.  I don't believe it will happen which is why I do see Hunter as being somewhat overpaid.  Ironically, you and FQ are actually aligned with his belief we will get a useful rotation player, dump salary, and get a first round pick for Hunter and your belief that Hunter has real value on his current deal.

I see Hunter as someone who is overpaid but fits an archetype that is difficult to fill.  All things being equal, I also agree with you that he gets easier to move for value the closer he gets to the end of his contract.  There is upside and risk depending on his interim performance (i.e., where all things are not equal).

[Peoriabird]

31 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

I don't think Hunter is overpaid necessarily but it still begs the question of why can't we move him. 

The Hawks could not even move Trae Young because of his salary

[Final_quest]

3 minutes ago, AHF said:

We are already past that point with the cutting we've done.  We have flexibility to make moves right now and next offseason just Nance and CC alone will be $34M coming off the books giving us significant flexibility.  Moving Hunter for Williams opens up ~$8M more space.  What do you do with that space this year?  Probably nothing.  Probably just take it to the bank like the $10M we could have used last season but didn't.  So what do we do with the salary differential it the next two offseasons?  What can we do because we have Williams on the roster and don't have Hunter that we couldn't have done if we hadn't made the trade?  That is the real question.

Just having restructured the NO deal to combine it with the Jonas trade would have freed up Zeller's salary and roster spot so if you want an easy return on flexibility that would have been a good place to start.

I'm not triggered by Tony making money to the point I just want to keep expensive role players the head coach doesn't like. 

Our financial position has sucked.  Making it even better is a win in my book.  

[AHF]

1 minute ago, Final_quest said:

Do you believe Quin has bought into Hunter?  I don't.   

Definitely not as a starter.  But we also saw what happens when you put that much on your starter without quality depth and Hunter was legit an impact player off the bench last season.  That has real value in a league where teams can't get enough two-way wings.  It isn't value on par with his contract but it isn't so far off that I think he must be cut immediately to open up space we aren't going to use anyway.  But that is me.  If we just dump Hunter for salary reasons and take an inferior player without that first round pick you envision, I will 100% agree with you that Fields and Quin simply don't buy into DeAndre.  If we demand real value in return, then I'm less convinced of that because we are content to hold him if we don't get real value in return.  We can argue about the impact on retaining Trae and thus the direction of the team for the next 5 years, etc. but a first round pick and Williams would represent real value (assuming no additional protections on the picks) to me.

[Final_quest]

3 minutes ago, AHF said:

That is value.  I don't believe it will happen which is why I do see Hunter as being somewhat overpaid.  Ironically, you and FQ are actually aligned with his belief we will get a useful rotation player, dump salary, and get a first round pick for Hunter and your belief that Hunter has real value on his current deal.

I see Hunter as someone who is overpaid but fits an archetype that is difficult to fill.  All things being equal, I also agree with you that he gets easier to move for value the closer he gets to the end of his contract.  There is upside and risk depending on his interim performance (i.e., where all things are not equal).

Bro, again that's not exactly what I've said.  I've never said what I believe we will get.  I'm responding to a rumored deal from insiders as being good for us.  That doesn't mean I believe it will happen.  

But I think your take on Hunter is fair. 

[Peoriabird]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

Definitely not as a starter.  But we also saw what happens when you put that much on your starter without quality depth and Hunter was legit an impact player off the bench last season.  That has real value in a league where teams can't get enough two-way wings.  It isn't value on par with his contract but it isn't so far off that I think he must be cut immediately to open up space we aren't going to use anyway.  But that is me.  If we just dump Hunter for salary reasons and take an inferior player without that first round pick you envision, I will 100% agree with you that Fields and Quin simply don't buy into DeAndre.  If we demand real value in return, then I'm less convinced of that because we are content to hold him if we don't get real value in return.  We can argue about the impact on retaining Trae and thus the direction of the team for the next 5 years, etc. but a first round pick and Williams would represent real value (assuming no additional protections on the picks) to me.

I think things will be different for him as a starter without Murray.  At least I am hopeful

[Final_quest]

19 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

Isn't the rumor a 1st round pick and productive player for Hunter?  How is that not value?  Teams don't offer a 1st to take on a bad contract.  It's usually the other way around.  

Well, we don't know what protections would be on the pick, but I would say this is the first decent deal we've heard about for Hunter.  That's why I think we should do it.  

[AtLaS]

15 minutes ago, AHF said:

That is value.  I don't believe it will happen which is why I do see Hunter as being somewhat overpaid.  Ironically, you and FQ are actually aligned with his belief we will get a useful rotation player, dump salary, and get a first round pick for Hunter and your belief that Hunter has real value on his current deal.

I see Hunter as someone who is overpaid but fits an archetype that is difficult to fill.  All things being equal, I also agree with you that he gets easier to move for value the closer he gets to the end of his contract.  There is upside and risk depending on his interim performance (i.e., where all things are not equal).

To set the record straight I don't want to trade Hunter for a lesser player and a protected pick.  I want to keep Hunter at least until the deadline or next offseason after we see how we perform this season.  

My point was to simply show that Hunter isn't a bad contract.  If a team is offering a pick for him it's not a bad contract.  Having Hunter as depth this year will be so huge for us.  He would be a 6MOY candidate IMO, or simply a solid starter.  Why downgrade the roster if we aren't even in the luxury tax and aren't likely to use the space gained by trading him?

[JTB]

2 hours ago, AHF said:

I'll say this, I will like the deal a lot more with a first than without one but I worry that we keep deteriorating the talent on this team at a time when I feel like we need to have more focus on winning because this team is radically different without Trae on board than with him. I don't think we'll get one but the top 14 protected Miami pick and top 2 protected Dallas picks are much more realistic.  The Miami pick becomes unprotected in 2028 if it fails to convey in 2027 which is very interesting.  The Dallas pick disappears completely if it falls in the top 2 (becoming a second rounder).  I think Dallas is better positioned for the next few years so it might make sense to trade that one to us but I'm still skeptical that Landry can get any of these without additional protections being put on them in a Hunter trade.

I've been burned by the Huerter trade that saw us trade him for an asset that probably won't be a positive impact on the floor until 2026.  We have a two year window to make it work with Trae.  The picks are meaningless for that window unless we flip them in a trade with the Miami pick perhaps contributing on the floor for the first time in 2029 and the Dallas pick in 2028.  We can't keep pushing returns on trades out that far into the future or we will end up with Trae bailing and us back in the lottery on a new rebuild, imo.  We've got to have a balance between immediate impact and future cap implications and I am not seeing big impact from the $8-10M per year in savings that Williams will bring over Hunter (at least the JC dump trade and Huerter dump trades got us under the tax which hasn't had much basketball impact but did have a big financial impact for Ressler).  We are already set to be a non-tax team for the foreseeable future so to make it impactful means adding a big FA or adding a big trade.  You are confident Landry will do exactly that and I hope you are right.

Yeah trust me I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying. It’s clear your biggest worry is Hunter or any of our talented players just being dumped to save money. At least that’s how I’m reading it.

i don’t particularly think that Nance can’t play PF but I’m also not surprised if the FO doesn’t see him at that position so that’s kind of where I am with it.

id rather keep nance as a backup 4 because I thought that was the intention but clearly he’s not being seen there.

It wasn’t too long ago that Supes told us that this same FO saw Ingram as SG when they were considering him. And then you have to remember that this same FO saw Murray as an SG (which I can say I thought it would work too) but it’s clear they see these players in different positional values then we do.

So I’ve just come to the conclusion that either our FO envisions these players completely different than us fans or perhaps it’s Quinn’s doing since he has a loud voice on how the roster is constructed based on what we’ve been told.

 

ive shifted gears in the hopes of “hey just get some kind of talent back”….cause we’ve been getting burned on trades the past 3 years. If you don’t think Hunter is a fit then ok get back a player who fits and can maximize his talents under Quinn’s style. Same with any other player not names Trae, Jalen, Risacher, Dyson….if the player don’t fit it’s no need to hold on to them anymore. Just don’t drop them for cash considerations as that would be senseless and utterly unacceptable.

[Sothron]

I watch the pelicans.  Nance doesn't have the foot speed to guard modern fours. He literally has played at least 85% of his minutes at center the last two seasons. 

He's not a pf anymore. I can't stress that enough.