The Dwightmare has begun in Atlanta

[kg01]

To me it's not that Clifford (or Bud) doesn't know how to utilize Dwight, it's that he just can't do it anymore. Not consistently. If he catches the ball outside the lane he doesn't give you a better chance at a basket than most guys shooting a 3. So what's the point?

The point is that Dwight doesn't need to score too be effective. As long as he's not blowing FT's, stepping out of bounds, or setting illegal screens he can still be a good player. It's trying to score that offsets all the postives he brings to the table

Everyone understands that except Dwight. The things you want him to do to help you win he won't or can't anymore.
He can't fix his free throws, it's a lost cause, but his relectance to set a solid legal screen, his affinity for illegal screens,his inability to defend the PnR and the careless turnovers magnify his problems.

Don't forget his penchant for flagrants. He loves some flagrants an inopportune times. Shocked he and Zeller haven't come to blows in practice yet, btw.

[Robo_Claw]

You were right guys. Clifford fed us a poo poo platter about knowing Dwights strengths and being familiar with him and playing him the right way. The Hornets are a mess right now.

Feel for ya man, we didn't listen to the Houston and Laker fans that were telling us the same story.

[jayu70]

Read on Twitter

[simon24]

You were right guys. Clifford fed us a poo poo platter about knowing Dwights strengths and being familiar with him and playing him the right way. The Hornets are a mess right now.

Feel for ya man, we didn't listen to the Houston and Laker fans that were telling us the same story.

Folks want to get excited about him getting numbers against CLE and MINN. I think at best he's a 6th man but Clifford seems to be scared to do that.

[LamarHampton]

Man I certainly get that Dwight has his limitations, but there are still just a few things about him and his situation in Atlanta that bug me. Seems like Atlanta fans to a great extent wanted him to be more than he was. I never shared those notions. I saw that he was brought in essentially as an attempt to cancel out one of the main weaknesses we had when we got swept in the ECF. We now had somebody that wasn't going to get punked by Tristan Thomson, and at the same time getting Al some help in the front court. Al chose to leave, which caused repercussions, so be it. Never held that against Dwight. Never bought into the rumors that he was a bad teammate, even remember hearing specifically that the team members voted him best teammate or stte and I think Bembry saying he spent a ton of time working with him and giving him guidance as a rookie. Rarely saw the poutiness / drama from him on the floor that I'd heard about and expected. Did witness him regularly getting abused down low and not get any calls or actually get blamed for the contact he did not initiate.
Also thought it was a terrible deal and honestly pretty disrespectful in what Schlenk did to him. First, it was just a bad trade. That we had to give up a great draft position and take on an extra year of a bad contract in plumlee still just baffles me. Think we could have netted a better return trading him this year or this offseason, and had a better prospect from this past draft. All the while avoiding the albatross contract of Plumlee that is worse from a return-on-value perspective and is longer to boot. Maybe we'll net some great return for Belli during a trade this year, but i doubt it will be that good and ... Well, Plumlee. Ick.
also, Dwight was a hometown guy that was a big name that actually wanted to play here, which gives him a fair amount of leeway in my book. To only give him a chance to play one year of his three-year deal in his hometown where he cried in his intro presser etc is a straight D move. Makes the organization look bad in my eyes, especially since they made a blatantly terrible trade, which also made it seem like Dwight was a piece of garbage, which he isn't. I never really thought he was going to stretch the floor, or hit a huge % of his FTs, or be the key to winning us wiinning a championship (although him and Al together would have been a pretty solid pairing that I iwish I could have seen, but Alice bailed so he is dead to me....). In all honesty Dwight met or exceeded every expectation I had for him here, and I'm sad he left how he left. I certainly realize he has his limitations, but he has skills that you can't deny either; he just needs to be utilized correctly, but trying to find that formula can be hard, I admit. Anyway, I haven't kept up with him since he left but I wish him well. I wish things had turned out differently for him and the Hawks both.
Sorry for the rant.

[macd-gm]

Man I certainly get that Dwight has his limitations, but there are still just a few things about him and his situation in Atlanta that bug me. Seems like Atlanta fans to a great extent wanted him to be more than he was. I never shared those notions. I saw that he was brought in essentially as an attempt to cancel out one of the main weaknesses we had when we got swept in the ECF. We now had somebody that wasn't going to get punked by Tristan Thomson, and at the same time getting Al some help in the front court. Al chose to leave, which caused repercussions, so be it. Never held that against Dwight. Never bought into the rumors that he was a bad teammate, even remember hearing specifically that the team members voted him best teammate or stte and I think Bembry saying he spent a ton of time working with him and giving him guidance as a rookie. Rarely saw the poutiness / drama from him on the floor that I'd heard about and expected. Did witness him regularly getting abused down low and not get any calls or actually get blamed for the contact he did not initiate.
Also thought it was a terrible deal and honestly pretty disrespectful in what Schlenk did to him. First, it was just a bad trade. That we had to give up a great draft position and take on an extra year of a bad contract in plumlee still just baffles me. Think we could have netted a better return trading him this year or this offseason, and had a better prospect from this past draft. All the while avoiding the albatross contract of Plumlee that is worse from a return-on-value perspective and is longer to boot. Maybe we'll net some great return for Belli during a trade this year, but i doubt it will be that good and ... Well, Plumlee. Ick.
also, Dwight was a hometown guy that was a big name that actually wanted to play here, which gives him a fair amount of leeway in my book. To only give him a chance to play one year of his three-year deal in his hometown where he cried in his intro presser etc is a straight D move. Makes the organization look bad in my eyes, especially since they made a blatantly terrible trade, which also made it seem like Dwight was a piece of garbage, which he isn't. I never really thought he was going to stretch the floor, or hit a huge % of his FTs, or be the key to winning us wiinning a championship (although him and Al together would have been a pretty solid pairing that I iwish I could have seen, but Alice bailed so he is dead to me....). In all honesty Dwight met or exceeded every expectation I had for him here, and I'm sad he left how he left. I certainly realize he has his limitations, but he has skills that you can't deny either; he just needs to be utilized correctly, but trying to find that formula can be hard, I admit. Anyway, I haven't kept up with him since he left but I wish him well. I wish things had turned out differently for him and the Hawks both.
Sorry for the rant.

I agree with most of this. Anyone who thinks Dwight didn't perform well in Atlanta had unrealistic expectations. In fact, the big concerns were would he be a distraction, would he be in constant foul trouble, would he be injured a lot. None of those things happened and he rebounded like crazy. Had Horford stayed I think it would have been interesting.

I don't think it was a bad trade. Dwight makes $25 mill/ Plumlee makes $12.5 mill. That's big savings. It is sucky that we shipped the hometown guy out but honestly i think Travis did him a favor. Do you think Dwight really wants to play on a 20 win team this late in his career? He'd be asking for a trade by now if he had stayed.

[DarthTater]

Man I certainly get that Dwight has his limitations, but there are still just a few things about him and his situation in Atlanta that bug me. Seems like Atlanta fans to a great extent wanted him to be more than he was. I never shared those notions. I saw that he was brought in essentially as an attempt to cancel out one of the main weaknesses we had when we got swept in the ECF. We now had somebody that wasn't going to get punked by Tristan Thomson, and at the same time getting Al some help in the front court. Al chose to leave, which caused repercussions, so be it. Never held that against Dwight. Never bought into the rumors that he was a bad teammate, even remember hearing specifically that the team members voted him best teammate or stte and I think Bembry saying he spent a ton of time working with him and giving him guidance as a rookie. Rarely saw the poutiness / drama from him on the floor that I'd heard about and expected. Did witness him regularly getting abused down low and not get any calls or actually get blamed for the contact he did not initiate.
Also thought it was a terrible deal and honestly pretty disrespectful in what Schlenk did to him. First, it was just a bad trade. That we had to give up a great draft position and take on an extra year of a bad contract in plumlee still just baffles me. Think we could have netted a better return trading him this year or this offseason, and had a better prospect from this past draft. All the while avoiding the albatross contract of Plumlee that is worse from a return-on-value perspective and is longer to boot. Maybe we'll net some great return for Belli during a trade this year, but i doubt it will be that good and ... Well, Plumlee. Ick.
also, Dwight was a hometown guy that was a big name that actually wanted to play here, which gives him a fair amount of leeway in my book. To only give him a chance to play one year of his three-year deal in his hometown where he cried in his intro presser etc is a straight D move. Makes the organization look bad in my eyes, especially since they made a blatantly terrible trade, which also made it seem like Dwight was a piece of garbage, which he isn't. I never really thought he was going to stretch the floor, or hit a huge % of his FTs, or be the key to winning us wiinning a championship (although him and Al together would have been a pretty solid pairing that I iwish I could have seen, but Alice bailed so he is dead to me....). In all honesty Dwight met or exceeded every expectation I had for him here, and I'm sad he left how he left. I certainly realize he has his limitations, but he has skills that you can't deny either; he just needs to be utilized correctly, but trying to find that formula can be hard, I admit. Anyway, I haven't kept up with him since he left but I wish him well. I wish things had turned out differently for him and the Hawks both.
Sorry for the rant.

I agree with most of this. Anyone who thinks Dwight didn't perform well in Atlanta had unrealistic expectations. In fact, the big concerns were would he be a distraction, would he be in constant foul trouble, would he be injured a lot. None of those things happened and he rebounded like crazy. Had Horford stayed I think it would have been interesting.

I don't think it was a bad trade. Dwight makes $25 mill/ Plumlee makes $12.5 mill. That's big savings. It is sucky that we shipped the hometown guy out but honestly i think Travis did him a favor. Do you think Dwight really wants to play on a 20 win team this late in his career? He'd be asking for a trade by now if he had stayed.

Perhaps he would want to leave, but what you get from Dwight for $25 million is a bargain compared to what you get from Plumlee (nothing) for $12.5 million.

[kg01]

Man I certainly get that Dwight has his limitations, but there are still just a few things about him and his situation in Atlanta that bug me. Seems like Atlanta fans to a great extent wanted him to be more than he was. I never shared those notions. I saw that he was brought in essentially as an attempt to cancel out one of the main weaknesses we had when we got swept in the ECF. We now had somebody that wasn't going to get punked by Tristan Thomson, and at the same time getting Al some help in the front court. Al chose to leave, which caused repercussions, so be it. Never held that against Dwight. Never bought into the rumors that he was a bad teammate, even remember hearing specifically that the team members voted him best teammate or stte and I think Bembry saying he spent a ton of time working with him and giving him guidance as a rookie. Rarely saw the poutiness / drama from him on the floor that I'd heard about and expected. Did witness him regularly getting abused down low and not get any calls or actually get blamed for the contact he did not initiate.
Also thought it was a terrible deal and honestly pretty disrespectful in what Schlenk did to him. First, it was just a bad trade. That we had to give up a great draft position and take on an extra year of a bad contract in plumlee still just baffles me. Think we could have netted a better return trading him this year or this offseason, and had a better prospect from this past draft. All the while avoiding the albatross contract of Plumlee that is worse from a return-on-value perspective and is longer to boot. Maybe we'll net some great return for Belli during a trade this year, but i doubt it will be that good and ... Well, Plumlee. Ick.
also, Dwight was a hometown guy that was a big name that actually wanted to play here, which gives him a fair amount of leeway in my book. To only give him a chance to play one year of his three-year deal in his hometown where he cried in his intro presser etc is a straight D move. Makes the organization look bad in my eyes, especially since they made a blatantly terrible trade, which also made it seem like Dwight was a piece of garbage, which he isn't. I never really thought he was going to stretch the floor, or hit a huge % of his FTs, or be the key to winning us wiinning a championship (although him and Al together would have been a pretty solid pairing that I iwish I could have seen, but Alice bailed so he is dead to me....). In all honesty Dwight met or exceeded every expectation I had for him here, and I'm sad he left how he left. I certainly realize he has his limitations, but he has skills that you can't deny either; he just needs to be utilized correctly, but trying to find that formula can be hard, I admit. Anyway, I haven't kept up with him since he left but I wish him well. I wish things had turned out differently for him and the Hawks both.
Sorry for the rant.

I agree with most of this. Anyone who thinks Dwight didn't perform well in Atlanta had unrealistic expectations. In fact, the big concerns were would he be a distraction, would he be in constant foul trouble, would he be injured a lot. None of those things happened and he rebounded like crazy. Had Horford stayed I think it would have been interesting.

I don't think it was a bad trade. Dwight makes $25 mill/ Plumlee makes $12.5 mill. That's big savings. It is sucky that we shipped the hometown guy out but honestly i think Travis did him a favor. Do you think Dwight really wants to play on a 20 win team this late in his career? He'd be asking for a trade by now if he had stayed.

Perhaps he would want to leave, but what you get from Dwight for $25 million is a bargain compared to what you get from Plumlee (nothing) for $12.5 million.

Heh, perhaps. I still think we'll end up trading Plums. That deal's been traded twice already so I'm not worried about it at all.

There's a sucker born every minute. We took our turn with it, someone else will be next.

[macd-gm]

Man I certainly get that Dwight has his limitations, but there are still just a few things about him and his situation in Atlanta that bug me. Seems like Atlanta fans to a great extent wanted him to be more than he was. I never shared those notions. I saw that he was brought in essentially as an attempt to cancel out one of the main weaknesses we had when we got swept in the ECF. We now had somebody that wasn't going to get punked by Tristan Thomson, and at the same time getting Al some help in the front court. Al chose to leave, which caused repercussions, so be it. Never held that against Dwight. Never bought into the rumors that he was a bad teammate, even remember hearing specifically that the team members voted him best teammate or stte and I think Bembry saying he spent a ton of time working with him and giving him guidance as a rookie. Rarely saw the poutiness / drama from him on the floor that I'd heard about and expected. Did witness him regularly getting abused down low and not get any calls or actually get blamed for the contact he did not initiate.
Also thought it was a terrible deal and honestly pretty disrespectful in what Schlenk did to him. First, it was just a bad trade. That we had to give up a great draft position and take on an extra year of a bad contract in plumlee still just baffles me. Think we could have netted a better return trading him this year or this offseason, and had a better prospect from this past draft. All the while avoiding the albatross contract of Plumlee that is worse from a return-on-value perspective and is longer to boot. Maybe we'll net some great return for Belli during a trade this year, but i doubt it will be that good and ... Well, Plumlee. Ick.
also, Dwight was a hometown guy that was a big name that actually wanted to play here, which gives him a fair amount of leeway in my book. To only give him a chance to play one year of his three-year deal in his hometown where he cried in his intro presser etc is a straight D move. Makes the organization look bad in my eyes, especially since they made a blatantly terrible trade, which also made it seem like Dwight was a piece of garbage, which he isn't. I never really thought he was going to stretch the floor, or hit a huge % of his FTs, or be the key to winning us wiinning a championship (although him and Al together would have been a pretty solid pairing that I iwish I could have seen, but Alice bailed so he is dead to me....). In all honesty Dwight met or exceeded every expectation I had for him here, and I'm sad he left how he left. I certainly realize he has his limitations, but he has skills that you can't deny either; he just needs to be utilized correctly, but trying to find that formula can be hard, I admit. Anyway, I haven't kept up with him since he left but I wish him well. I wish things had turned out differently for him and the Hawks both.
Sorry for the rant.

I agree with most of this. Anyone who thinks Dwight didn't perform well in Atlanta had unrealistic expectations. In fact, the big concerns were would he be a distraction, would he be in constant foul trouble, would he be injured a lot. None of those things happened and he rebounded like crazy. Had Horford stayed I think it would have been interesting.

I don't think it was a bad trade. Dwight makes $25 mill/ Plumlee makes $12.5 mill. That's big savings. It is sucky that we shipped the hometown guy out but honestly i think Travis did him a favor. Do you think Dwight really wants to play on a 20 win team this late in his career? He'd be asking for a trade by now if he had stayed.

Perhaps he would want to leave, but what you get from Dwight for $25 million is a bargain compared to what you get from Plumlee (nothing) for $12.5 million.

But that's the rub right? We don't want anything from either of them right now. And by the time we want something Dwight would be old, or already gone, or injured or whatever. If you just want a backup center who's not going to move the needle toward useless wins do you want to pay him $25m or $12m?

[DarthTater]

I agree with most of this. Anyone who thinks Dwight didn't perform well in Atlanta had unrealistic expectations. In fact, the big concerns were would he be a distraction, would he be in constant foul trouble, would he be injured a lot. None of those things happened and he rebounded like crazy. Had Horford stayed I think it would have been interesting.

I don't think it was a bad trade. Dwight makes $25 mill/ Plumlee makes $12.5 mill. That's big savings. It is sucky that we shipped the hometown guy out but honestly i think Travis did him a favor. Do you think Dwight really wants to play on a 20 win team this late in his career? He'd be asking for a trade by now if he had stayed.

Perhaps he would want to leave, but what you get from Dwight for $25 million is a bargain compared to what you get from Plumlee (nothing) for $12.5 million.

But that's the rub right? We don't want anything from either of them right now. And by the time we want something Dwight would be old, or already gone, or injured or whatever. If you just want a backup center who's not going to move the needle toward useless wins do you want to pay him $25m or $12m?

To me, trading Dwight was the indication that we were going to tank, so I don't see us tanking if Dwight was still here. I don't want to pay a backup center (or backup anything else) $12.5 million. We're already overpaying Muscala. Why waste more money on worthless players?

[macd-gm]

Exactly. We were going to tank. So given that was the plan I don't see how Travis could or should have done anything else but trade Dwight. If the argument is about whether we should tank then that's different. But since that's what the Hawks decided to do I don't see the Dwight trade as a bad one for the franchise or Dwight. I don't think we should have not tanked just because we had just signed Dwight.

[DarthTater]

Exactly. We were going to tank. So given that was the plan I don't see how Travis could or should have done anything else but trade Dwight. If the argument is about whether we should tank then that's different. But since that's what the Hawks decided to do I don't see the Dwight trade as a bad one for the franchise or Dwight. I don't think we should have not tanked just because we had just signed Dwight.

I personally dislike tanking. To me it suggests that the GM doesn't have enough confidence in his own ability to improve the team without gutting it. Players and coaches get fired or even banned from their sport, for "throwing games." How is this different (other than we are throwing seasons, rather than individual games?)

[kg01]

Exactly. We were going to tank. So given that was the plan I don't see how Travis could or should have done anything else but trade Dwight. If the argument is about whether we should tank then that's different. But since that's what the Hawks decided to do I don't see the Dwight trade as a bad one for the franchise or Dwight. I don't think we should have not tanked just because we had just signed Dwight.

I personally dislike tanking. To me it suggests that the GM doesn't have enough confidence in his own ability to improve the team without gutting it. Players and coaches get fired or even banned from their sport, for "throwing games." How is this different (other than we are throwing seasons, rather than individual games?)

I don't like it either. I've gotten to a point where I 'understand' it, to a degree. Due to the cap and the nature of the NBA in general, it's not like a GM can just "decide" to build a better team. There are too many factors that are out of his control.

A big mitigating factor being the fact that you must have premium talent in order to truly contend. It's not negotiable. What we've done the past 3-4 years is clear proof of that. Tanking simply allows us to get the best opportunity to acquire premium talent via the draft or via trade (of lotto picks).

[macd-gm]

Exactly. We were going to tank. So given that was the plan I don't see how Travis could or should have done anything else but trade Dwight. If the argument is about whether we should tank then that's different. But since that's what the Hawks decided to do I don't see the Dwight trade as a bad one for the franchise or Dwight. I don't think we should have not tanked just because we had just signed Dwight.

I personally dislike tanking. To me it suggests that the GM doesn't have enough confidence in his own ability to improve the team without gutting it. Players and coaches get fired or even banned from their sport, for "throwing games." How is this different (other than we are throwing seasons, rather than individual games?)

I'm not a big fan of it either but in this situation it might be best. The sale of the team, Budcox gm dysfunction, and Horford leaving had left us in a bad spot. So I don't think we had a lot of choice and that wasn't Travis' fault.

[DarthTater]

Exactly. We were going to tank. So given that was the plan I don't see how Travis could or should have done anything else but trade Dwight. If the argument is about whether we should tank then that's different. But since that's what the Hawks decided to do I don't see the Dwight trade as a bad one for the franchise or Dwight. I don't think we should have not tanked just because we had just signed Dwight.

I personally dislike tanking. To me it suggests that the GM doesn't have enough confidence in his own ability to improve the team without gutting it. Players and coaches get fired or even banned from their sport, for "throwing games." How is this different (other than we are throwing seasons, rather than individual games?)

I don't like it either. I've gotten to a point where I 'understand' it, to a degree. Due to the cap and the nature of the NBA in general, it's not like a GM can just "decide" to build a better team. There are too many factors that are out of his control.

A big mitigating factor being the fact that you must have premium talent in order to truly contend. It's not negotiable. What we've done the past 3-4 years is clear proof of that. Tanking simply allows us to get the best opportunity to acquire premium talent via the draft or via trade (of lotto picks).

To me, San Antonio has proven that it can be done. Duncan was pretty much used up his last few years, as are Parker and Ginobili presently. Yet they managed to acquire Leonard (if I recall correctly, a late first rounder), add Aldridge, etc. without blowing up the team and losing for several years in a row while rebuilding. Are they as good as the Duncan teams? Probably not, but they are still legitimate contenders in my opinion.

[kg01]

I personally dislike tanking. To me it suggests that the GM doesn't have enough confidence in his own ability to improve the team without gutting it. Players and coaches get fired or even banned from their sport, for "throwing games." How is this different (other than we are throwing seasons, rather than individual games?)

I don't like it either. I've gotten to a point where I 'understand' it, to a degree. Due to the cap and the nature of the NBA in general, it's not like a GM can just "decide" to build a better team. There are too many factors that are out of his control.

A big mitigating factor being the fact that you must have premium talent in order to truly contend. It's not negotiable. What we've done the past 3-4 years is clear proof of that. Tanking simply allows us to get the best opportunity to acquire premium talent via the draft or via trade (of lotto picks).

To me, San Antonio has proven that it can be done. Duncan was pretty much used up his last few years, as are Parker and Ginobili presently. Yet they managed to acquire Leonard (if I recall correctly, a late first rounder), add Aldridge, etc. without blowing up the team and losing for several years in a row while rebuilding. Are they as good as the Duncan teams? Probably not, but they are still legitimate contenders in my opinion.

SAS has a championship track record. We do not. Free agency, at a high level, is not available to us at this point. Just as chasing the '05 DET model was fool's gold, chasing the "SAS" method would be a fool's errand as well.

Look at it like this, we've had picks in the same range at which Leonard was taken. The difference is, we don't have HOFers on our roster and we don't have rings to attract free agents. Two huge differences.

[DarthTater]

I don't like it either. I've gotten to a point where I 'understand' it, to a degree. Due to the cap and the nature of the NBA in general, it's not like a GM can just "decide" to build a better team. There are too many factors that are out of his control.

A big mitigating factor being the fact that you must have premium talent in order to truly contend. It's not negotiable. What we've done the past 3-4 years is clear proof of that. Tanking simply allows us to get the best opportunity to acquire premium talent via the draft or via trade (of lotto picks).

To me, San Antonio has proven that it can be done. Duncan was pretty much used up his last few years, as are Parker and Ginobili presently. Yet they managed to acquire Leonard (if I recall correctly, a late first rounder), add Aldridge, etc. without blowing up the team and losing for several years in a row while rebuilding. Are they as good as the Duncan teams? Probably not, but they are still legitimate contenders in my opinion.

SAS has a championship track record. We do not. Free agency, at a high level, is not available to us at this point. Just as chasing the '05 DET model was fool's gold, chasing the "SAS" method would be a fool's errand as well.

Look at it like this, we've had picks in the same range at which Leonard was taken. The difference is, we don't have HOFers on our roster and we don't have rings to attract free agents. Two huge differences.

Fair enough, but the naughty side of me wants to say, "But, but, but Schroeder! But, but, but Collins!"

[kg01]

To me, San Antonio has proven that it can be done. Duncan was pretty much used up his last few years, as are Parker and Ginobili presently. Yet they managed to acquire Leonard (if I recall correctly, a late first rounder), add Aldridge, etc. without blowing up the team and losing for several years in a row while rebuilding. Are they as good as the Duncan teams? Probably not, but they are still legitimate contenders in my opinion.

SAS has a championship track record. We do not. Free agency, at a high level, is not available to us at this point. Just as chasing the '05 DET model was fool's gold, chasing the "SAS" method would be a fool's errand as well.

Look at it like this, we've had picks in the same range at which Leonard was taken. The difference is, we don't have HOFers on our roster and we don't have rings to attract free agents. Two huge differences.

Fair enough, but the naughty side of me wants to say, "But, but, but Schroeder! But, but, but Collins!"

Ha, yeah. Seems half of us are looking to ship Dennis out too though. We're so weird as a fanbase.

I'm just gonna (try to) enjoy the ride.

[macd-gm]

Spurs acquired Robinson and Duncan through tanking/high lottery picks. The rest is history.

[kg01]

Spurs acquired Robinson and Duncan through tanking/high lottery picks. The rest is history.

In 20 years and a couple-a Hawks titles, some poor franchise will be making that same statement. Only, instead of Spurs, Robinson and Duncan, it'll be Hawks, Collins and Ayton. Boom.