Will the Schlenk/Budenholzer partnership work?

[macd-gm]

To me last year is looking super impressive. Jettisened our starting all star center, starting PG, starting SG, replaced them with their backups and Dwight Howard and still finished 5th in the east.

And that's where I differ.

43 wins and a bottom five offense is difficult to tout as a source of pride...

There's a reason we chose to cut ties with pretty much everyone after the season. (Wilcox, Dwight, Millsap, Thabo--demoted BUdenholzer)

You're giving coaches credit for losing their best player and still having success. Last year we lost 2 of our 3 best players and still had the same level of success.

[Jamaaliver]

I've lived through the likes of Bob Weiss and that other college dude who's name escapes me so I have a great appreciation for Budz while admitting he has flaws. I also see a LOT of horrid coaches around the league so I don't want to wade back into those waters again.

Great points. I wholeheartedly understand.

I'm cool with you being anti-Budz but only if you can present a better alternative.

Now that's less fair. Neither of us know in depth who the next, hot young assistant coaches are.

Truth is, we knew very little of Mike Budenholzer before he got the job here. None of us knew that Steve Kerr would be one of the greatest coaches in NBA history when he took the GSW job.

But Schlenk is undoubtedly compiling a list, keeping his ears open and making overtures behind the scenes in case we find ourselves without a coach next summer. (Whispers have arisen that this is the lame duck year for Bud.)



NOTE: I'm not so much anti-Budenholzer. But I am a realist. A bottom line guy. And if we're aiming to build a contender, I can't say I have faith in Bud to out coach Popovich, Kerr or even Brad Stevens in a 7 game playoff series.

[Jamaaliver]

To me last year is looking super impressive. Jettisened our starting all star center, starting PG, starting SG, replaced them with their backups and Dwight Howard and still finished 5th in the east.

And that's where I differ.

43 wins and a bottom five offense is difficult to tout as a source of pride...

There's a reason we chose to cut ties with pretty much everyone after the season. (Wilcox, Dwight, Millsap, Thabo--demoted BUdenholzer)

You're giving coaches credit for losing their best player and still having success. Last year we lost 2 of our 3 best players and still had the same level of success.

Yeah, you lost me again.

Losing Hayward and not replacing him on the roster is very different than choosing to trade Teague and essentially replacing Horford with Dwight.

There is no legit replacement for Kawhi on that squad. No legit replacement for Hayward. Those coaches promoted lesser options from within using a next man up strategy.

But I will simply defer to you on the argument...for now.

I respect your perspective and opinion.

[kg01]

I've lived through the likes of Bob Weiss and that other college dude who's name escapes me so I have a great appreciation for Budz while admitting he has flaws. I also see a LOT of horrid coaches around the league so I don't want to wade back into those waters again.

Great points. I wholeheartedly understand.

I'm cool with you being anti-Budz but only if you can present a better alternative.

Now that's less fair. Neither of us know in depth who the next, hot young assistant coaches are.

Truth is, we knew very little of Mike Budenholzer before he got the job here. None of us knew that Steve Kerr would be one of the greatest coaches in NBA history when he took the GSW job.

But Schlenk is undoubtedly compiling a list, keeping his ears open and making overtures behind the scenes in case we find ourselves without a coach next summer. (Whispers have arisen that this is the lame duck year for Bud.)



NOTE: I'm not so much anti-Budenholzer. But I am a realist. A bottom line guy. And if we're aiming to build a contender, I can't say I have faith in Bud to out coach Popovich, Kerr or even Brad Stevens in a 7 game playoff series.

O' Rly?

And it's completely fair to ask for your picks if you're looking to get rid of Budz. Schlenk has a list. Any decent GM has a list. That doesn't mean Budz is a lameduck. Who said this, btw?

ETA: And I'm so sick of the anointing of Brad Stevens. They were out in the 1st round, again, last year if Rondo doesn't get hurt. Let's let his career play out before we re-name the Larry O'Brien trophy for him.

[Jamaaliver]

And it's completely fair to ask for your picks if you're looking to get rid of Budz. Schlenk has a list. Any decent GM has a list. That doesn't mean Budz is a lameduck. Who said this, btw?

Because you asked so nicely.

Here

[macd-gm]

Those coaches promoted lesser options from within using a next man up strategy.

Isn't that exactly what we did with Teague, Korver, Demarre?

Anyway. We'll see what next season holds. Hopefully Bud without Baze and Delaney.

[macd-gm]

If you won't listen to proven experts like me then please consider the city of Atlanta's track record with replacing good quality coaches.

Fratello > Weiss
Wilkens > Kruger

Leeman Bennett > Dan Henning

Joe Torre > Eddie Haas

[Spud2nique]

If you won't listen to proven experts like me then please consider the city of Atlanta's track record with replacing good quality coaches.

Fratello > Weiss
Wilkens > Kruger

Leeman Bennett > Dan Henning

Joe Torre > Eddie Haas

You said Kruger and my left eye just twitched...oh the horror. Please give Bud a 20 year deal! Lol.

[Jamaaliver]

Those coaches promoted lesser options from within using a next man up strategy.

Isn't that exactly what we did with Teague, Korver, Demarre?

I don't follow. Korver was a starter before Budenholzer got here.
Teague was a starter before even Danny Ferry got here.

DeMarre was a starter from Day one when he got here...in a losing season.

There was no injury situation involved that saw them promoted.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Seriously, though. It's just a dialogue at this point. But the signs are there that the clock might be ticking on Bud's tenure.

He might legit choose to walk away as the franchise changes direction.

[Jamaaliver]

There is no better endorser for a coach:

Read on Twitter

[MaceCase]

Can we really anoint Kerr as "one of the greatest coaches in NBA history" when we've seen the likes of Mark Jackson, Luke Walton and Mike Brown have success with that same roster? I mean, these are not great coaches by any stretch yet how do you discount Jackson getting them to 51-31 in his final season, Walton coaching more regular season games than Kerr during their historic 73-9 season with a 39-4 record, and Brown coaching them over numerous stints last season including a 12-0 record in the playoffs?

There isn't much realism here just a double standard of Bud being held accountable for circumstances of his roster while others are propped up despite the circumstances of their roster.

[Jamaaliver]

^This is a fair question.

I'm not sure it's a double standard because history will indeed judge Kerr to be one of the best. He took a team that got trounced in the first round of the 2014 playoffs and, with minor alterations, led the same group to dominate the 2015 season.

From 6th seed to dominant NBA champ in 13 months.

But this is a valid point. Particularly the Luke Walton tenure as head of "the greatest Regular Season team of all time".

[MaceCase]

History will indeed judge him to be one of the best.... because his assistants' records go underneath his. It is definitely a double standard because look at the amount of revisionist history going on to prop him up. Firstly Mark Jackson was not trounced in the first round, him and the Warriors took the 57 win Clippers to 7 games. Jackson and the Warriors made it to the 2nd round the previous year and lost in 6 games to the eventual Western Conference Champion Spurs. One could easily attribute the Warriors' rise to the natural development of an already highly talented core rather than coaching specifically since we've seen two other coaches do just as well if not better with that same roster despite abysmal success elsewhere (well for Brown, anything without LeBron).

I just can't see how one could applaud Kerr under those dubious circumstances but then dismiss Bud taking the 1 seed to 7 games with a remade 38 win team 8th seed with only one starter from the previous year before turning that into a 60 win ECF team a season later. Again, other coaches are getting propped on the basis of their rosters while Bud is getting punished solely without the basis of his roster. A better question to ask, would Bud seriously do worse than Mark Jackosn, Luke Walton and Mike Brown with the Warriors' roster?

[jayu70]

Like I said before, I would like to see Bud have a chance to coach some serious talent. Our own Kawhi, our own Steph, heck even our own Ginobli - not the slightly used versions of these guys.
Real top end talent.

[MaceCase]

Like I said before, I would like to see Bud have a chance to coach some serious talent. Our own Kawhi, our own Steph, heck even our own Ginobli - not the slightly used versions of these guys.
Real top end talent.

Heck, I would have liked to have seen what he would have done with even just the talent of Woody's baby Hawks.

edit: A quick google search reveals that baby hawks are called "eyass". Don't ever say I never did nothing for you, folks.

[Jamaaliver]

What every team should be thankful for in 2017-18

Atlanta Hawks

What to be thankful for: Mike Budenholzer

Apart from an elite head coach, the Atlanta Hawks don’t have much more going for them as a franchise at the moment. If nothing else, the Hawks and its fans should be thankful that Budenholzer is still the team’s fearless leader.

The Hawks likely aren’t going to make the playoffs this season, and might not for a few years, but having a good head coach in the fold is a lot easier said than done.

Sir Charles in Charge

[macd-gm]

Those coaches promoted lesser options from within using a next man up strategy.

Isn't that exactly what we did with Teague, Korver, Demarre?

I don't follow. Korver was a starter before Budenholzer got here.
Teague was a starter before even Danny Ferry got here.

DeMarre was a starter from Day one when he got here...in a losing season.

There was no injury situation involved that saw them promoted.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Seriously, though. It's just a dialogue at this point. But the signs are there that the clock might be ticking on Bud's tenure.

He might legit choose to walk away as the franchise changes direction.

My point was that we lost all the starters from our 60 win season and replaced them by promoting lesser options using the next man up strategy as you point out. Makes no difference that we didn't lose these guys to injury. We lost them.

Lost Teague > replaced with backup Dennis
Lost Korver > replaced with backup Baze
Lost Demarre > replaced with Baze/Thabo whoever
Lost Horford > replaced with broken Dwight Howard but at least we tried to replace him. Of course ultimately we were playing 4th quarters with backup Moose.

So Bud lost all these guys but continued to have success until we finally decided to tank.

More succinctly we lost 4 starters from our 60 win season and replaced all but one with guys from the bench. How can you expect to do well? but in fact we did ok. A lesser coach would have never made the playoffs with the group we had last year.

[Jamaaliver]

Makes no difference that we didn't lose these guys to injury. We lost them.

...A lesser coach would have never made the playoffs with the group we had last year.

The scenario I'm presenting isn't one I'm advocating -- or predicting. It's a distinct possibility we simply have to consider. All these other weird hypotheticals don't change that:

Is Mike Budenholzer actually on the hot seat?

...with the arrival of general manager Travis Schlenk, it’s fair to question whether Budenholzer will last in this role. Schlenk didn’t hire Budenholzer and general managers tend to want to bring in their own guys to lead the team on the floor.

Whether by choice or not, the Hawks may be looking for a new coach come next April; it’s not inconceivable that Budenholzer will want to move on from an Atlanta team that doesn’t look particularly close to contending...

Peachtree Hoops

[tbhawksfan1]

Makes no difference that we didn't lose these guys to injury. We lost them.

...A lesser coach would have never made the playoffs with the group we had last year.

The scenario I'm presenting isn't one I'm advocating -- or predicting. It's a distinct possibility we simply have to consider. All these other weird hypotheticals don't change that:

Is Mike Budenholzer actually on the hot seat?

...with the arrival of general manager Travis Schlenk, it’s fair to question whether Budenholzer will last in this role. Schlenk didn’t hire Budenholzer and general managers tend to want to bring in their own guys to lead the team on the floor.

Whether by choice or not, the Hawks may be looking for a new coach come next April; it’s not inconceivable that Budenholzer will want to move on from an Atlanta team that doesn’t look particularly close to contending...

Peachtree Hoops

BS article. TS and Bud are the next thing in the NBA. Bud is running the best 3-13 show the NBA has ever seen. No real blow-outs, young guys killing it (Prince, Collins) and the draft picks are lining up.

Give TS and Bud time to build their team. Keep Shro focused.

[Jamaaliver]

As Hawks rebuild, Budenholzer shows he will rely on young players

Before the season, with speculation about whether Mike Budenholzer would be on board with the roster rebuild, I wrote:

“Surely Budenholzer would rather be chasing championships as a coach/top executive. But that’s no longer his job with the Hawks. I think he will do his best to win as many games as he can with the team he’s got, while also staying faithful to the organization’s long-term plan.”

After 20 games, I’d say that’s what Budenholzer has been doing with the 2017-18 Hawks.

I think that shows Budenholzer’s willingness to play young guys in service to player development. That’s the way it should be for the Hawks during Phase 1 of their rebuild–really, how many more victories would they have if Budenholzer didn’t play the fringe youngsters?

Budenholzer had never been in this situation though, either as a longtime Spurs assistant or Hawks head coach, so now we have evidence that he’s on board with the long-term plan.

myAJC
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

J Schultz of AJC assesses the future prospects of the Hawks below:

Reasons to feel good: Mike Budenholzer can coach. He is often criticized for his bench rotations and in-game strategy but helping turn around a franchise and winning 108 of 164 regular-season games (.659) and getting to an Eastern Conference finals in the last two years speaks volumes about his abilities.

Reasons to wonder: There are major questions about what direction the Hawks need to go in and they may need a stronger big-picture, personnel-driven executive in the front office. Budenholzer was elevated to president of basketball operations last year but giving that kind of power to a coach only two years into his tenure is risky.[/color]

AJC from May 2016