Are we trying to win or tank

[truehawksfan121]

Looking at all of the off season moves the hawks has made haven't put us in a position to compete with the top 5 teams in the east. Some teams that we finished ahead of last have more talent then the hawks. I'm not sure if we are better than Cleveland, Toronto, or Washington. Even Detroit and Charlotte tried to improve there roster. Do u think the hawks are trying to get a top 5 pick in this year draft. I just don't think we have a winning team this year. I feel the worst thing we can do is to finish 7-9 this year. What is Danny ferry plan with this team.

[HMFFL]

I think Danny is trying to stay competitive and is hoping for us to have as much success as possible.

Barring injury, we won't have a bad enough team to be in position for a top five pick, so running the course, and staying competitive seems to be our plan.

[PandaKidd]

I dont think people realize how much time it takes to get to the level of being competitive top 3 teams in a conference.

We are not purposefully tanking, Ferry made moves to fill spots, and field trade bait IMO. If you cant sign top level talent, you have 2 options:
1) tank which means gutting your current team, we didnt. Acquire draft picks.

2) Sign the best talent you can, in hopes of A) Developing it B) trading it for what you need.

Right now we are in position to still be competitive, but are not locked into any long term deals besides Korver (easily trade worthy). We maintain flexibility, which means we get tot ry again next year.

IMO Tanking is too risky for a franchise and i dont really think anyone in the NBA does it on purpose. Tanking for a guy none of us have seen play in college yet to base your entire multi million dollar franchise on, seems incredibly short sighted.

IF, ferry turns Milsap or horford into 2-3 first round picks, then i would think he was comfortable blowing it all up. But I think he had that opportunity last year, and chose not to do it.

[Jamaaliver]

IMO Tanking is too risky for a franchise and i dont really think anyone in the NBA does it on purpose.

While I agree that tanking is too risky, there's been a number of teams over the years that have tanked on purpose.

Celtics in 2008 for the Oden draft comes to mind...

But they were already a losing team. They just gave up completely altogether.

We start tanking, even if we get Wiggins, we'd still be terrible for years. Just ask Cleveland. Or Washington. Getting a top player at #1 does not guarantee success.

[PandaKidd]

A team like Utah, IMO, is tanking on purpose. they have good pieces, young talent, and they GUTTED their team, let everyone walk. they were a 9th seed almost 8th all year.

[truehawksfan121]

I hear everyone is saying we are still going to be competitive the problem I'm having is I just don't see it. I was hoping the hawks did something exciting this summer. At least we should have gotten a center so we could move al horford to the 4. I believe we took some steps back this year. I am very disappointed with our offseason and now our team is boring and its gone be hard to watch. I don't see us being good at all. We look like the Utah jazz of the east. Who is going to produce highlights in the highlight factory.

[PandaKidd]

In many ways our roster is better than last year.

For most of the season, we didnt have Lou Williams, ZAZA was hurt last 2 months.

The guys we lost were EXPIRING CONTRACTS way past their prime and HURT.
-Devin Harris
-Deshawn Stevenson
-Anthony Tolliver
-Ivan Johnson
-JOhan Petro
-Dahntay Jones
-Shelvin Mack (he came in at the end IIRC)
-Josh SMith

This year:
-Paul Millsap : Makes up for Josh Smith being gone IMO, close enough
-Elton Brand : zaza like
-Pero Antic : backup
-Cunningham
-DeMarre Carroll
-John Jenkins
-Schroeder

with money to spend.

THE CORE really didnt change much. We went from Josh Smith to Millsap, but teague, horford, lou will all there.

We are DEF younger and more athletic

[jagstang76]

I addressed this on another thread (I'm too lazy to link it), but essentially I don't see tanking as being a reasonable option. We did that, and the talent we got never learned how to win. If you look at SAS and other consistently great franchises in sports, they maintain their winning ways by adding young talent to an already competitive team where the "values" of winning are passed on. I believe Ferry is doing that with keeping guys like Horford and signing guys like Millsap and Carroll and Brand. They will infuse this team with the right mentality to win, whether we get very far or not. Then, as Ferry adds more talent, these young players will be influenced positively and increase the team's chances of winning. And the snowball will grow and outside talent will then become more attracted to this team because of the winning culture that has been created. Eventually, whether we draft someone that will put us over the top or sign them, we will be in the conversation of championships if we stay this course.

[tcorbin]

Looking at all of the off season moves the hawks has made haven't put us in a position to compete with the top 5 teams in the east. Some teams that we finished ahead of last have more talent then the hawks. I'm not sure if we are better than Cleveland, Toronto, or Washington. Even Detroit and Charlotte tried to improve there roster. Do u think the hawks are trying to get a top 5 pick in this year draft. I just don't think we have a winning team this year.

Yes and yep

[tcorbin]

IMO Tanking is too risky for a franchise and i dont really think anyone in the NBA does it on purpose.

While I agree that tanking is too risky, there's been a number of teams over the years that have tanked on purpose.

Celtics in 2008 for the Oden draft comes to mind...

But they were already a losing team. They just gave up completely altogether.

We start tanking, even if we get Wiggins, we'd still be terrible for years. Just ask Cleveland. Or Washington. Getting a top player at #1 does not guarantee success.

This is dumb as usual. Denver, Seattle, and the Clippers all tanked, didn't trade anybody away, and still got good really fast.

[PandaKidd]

Im starting to think you only started watching basketball in the last 5 years.

theres a difference between being BAD and trading assets away to get better, and intentionally gutting your team that is a playoff team to be a bottom feeder for the draft.

you dont know the difference. in your mind, any team that has a bad season is TANKING intentionally to get a #1 draft pick. GMs would get fired if that was the norm.

[tomaHAWKslam]

I think Danny is trying to stay competitive and is hoping for us to have as much success as possible.

Barring injury, we won't have a bad enough team to be in position for a top five pick, so running the course, and staying competitive seems to be our plan.

I agree with that. It all depends on how well the team responds to the new coaching staff, but I just don't see us as a bottom dwelling team. I think we'll be competing somewhere in the 7th to 9th in the east range.

[PandaKidd]

I think Ferry deserves 3 full seasons before we evaluate. you cant give up after 1 FULL offseason.

His 1st season we remained a playoff team while cutting salary and dumping JJ.

Im not so sure we move forward this year in terms of round 2 or anything, but we did add pieces, and we did get younger. This year i look at us going a step backwards in terms of playoff possibilities or we stay the same.

But next offseason, is where we see what Ferry does IMO. He knows players arent coming here now no matter what $$ we throw at them.

he strikes out next offseason, then ill be ready to say he had his shot.

IMO, it all hinges on Bud. If Bud is a great coach , then we will be fine. If hes not, we will regret the chance we had to bring a big name in here

[theatlfan]

After striking out on CP3 and then Howard, I think Ferry is thinking that he'll give Horford a go at being our superstar. SAS has an O that has featured a PF/C for years in Robinson and then Duncan and considering the contract we've got Horford on, it'd be a shame not to at least give him the chance to fill that role. If it works, then Ferry has rebuilt us in a year; if not, we're only tied to this team for 2 years and even then, our assets will most likely be tradeable.

In all reality, it isn't a bad move - too many are pinning their hopes on the '14 class to think that we could tank our way to Wiggins or even a top 5 pick. UTH and PHI are going with kids; BOS and, to a lesser extent, TOR has ripped apart their team; I don't see ORL, CHAR, PHX, or SAC being significantly better. Even if we did tear down, we're probably looking at a pick in the bottom 1/2 of the top 10 which isn't generally a place where you can nab a superstar anyway.

If you look at SAS and other consistently great franchises in sports, they maintain their winning ways by adding young talent to an already competitive team where the "values" of winning are passed on. I believe Ferry is doing that with keeping guys like Horford and signing guys like Millsap and Carroll and Brand. They will infuse this team with the right mentality to win, whether we get very far or not. Then, as Ferry adds more talent, these young players will be influenced positively and increase the team's chances of winning. And the snowball will grow and outside talent will then become more attracted to this team because of the winning culture that has been created. Eventually, whether we draft someone that will put us over the top or sign them, we will be in the conversation of championships if we stay this course.

You do realize that SAS intentionally tanked to get Duncan - right? They knew David Robinson was going to be out for the year and instead of arming themselves to try to get an 8 seed and see if Robinson would be back for a playoff run, they put together a team whose best player was a 37 yo Dominique Wilkins. I have no idea why SAS gets the tag of "always going for it" - maybe it's just been so long since they haven't had a superstar player that people forget that no, they did indeed tank a season to establish their line of succession in terms of having a superstar big. The same can be said of MIA who dumped what amounts to 3 1sts - including a former #2 overall pick and the pick that became Eric Bledsoe - for 3 2nds and some cash and this was *before* they landed either Bosh or LeBron or even knew that Wade was staying. Clubs tank all the time in the NBA and thinking they don't is either revisionist history or a terrible memory.

In the NBA the only teams that seem to attempt to consistently win are the teams that already have a superstar in place. The primary goal should be getting that superstar and once he's in place, then build the winning culture. Many question the move of the NOP in giving up 2 lotto picks in trading for Jrue Holiday, but their thinking was clear: they consider Brow to be a future superstar and with him in place, they are moving on to establishing the winning culture. Not necessarily saying it was a good move for them (they paid dearly for someone whose production is questionable), but the concept here is clear: Step A) get a superstar *then* Step B) establish a winning culture around him.

[PandaKidd]

What if you cant get a superstar. Hawks havent had a superstar since Wilkins.

IMO at that point you have to have a coach players want to play for.

I also disageee with SAS tanking to get Duncan.

[Jamaaliver]

IMO Tanking is too risky for a franchise and i dont really think anyone in the NBA does it on purpose.

While I agree that tanking is too risky, there's been a number of teams over the years that have tanked on purpose.

Celtics in 2008 for the Oden draft comes to mind...

But they were already a losing team. They just gave up completely altogether.

We start tanking, even if we get Wiggins, we'd still be terrible for years. Just ask Cleveland. Or Washington. Getting a top player at #1 does not guarantee success.

This is dumb as usual. Denver, Seattle, and the Clippers all tanked, didn't trade anybody away, and still got good really fast.

1. When did Denver tank?
1B. When did Denver get good?
2. Clippers only got good from getting Chris Paul.
3. OKC was terrible for a few years after Durant. it's how they got Westbrook and Harden years later. Plus, they kinda lucked into the 2nd best player in the world...

[PandaKidd]

I dont remember denver ever being GOOD. Who did they tank for ? Is he talking about them drafting Melo?

Clippers drafted Griffin (who say out a year) and stole CP3 from NO

Seattle won like 22 games Durants rookie season, and the report on Durant was he was not going to be a superstar. He would be a good player. Kinda got that wrong

[theatlfan]

What if you cant get a superstar. Hawks havent had a superstar since Wilkins.

IMO at that point you have to have a coach players want to play for.

I also disageee with SAS tanking to get Duncan.

If you can't get or create a superstar, then you hit the reset button and try again down the line. It appears that Ferry has set the time frame for his reset button for 2 years down the road when we'll have 3 players under contract (Horford @ $12M; Teague @ $8M; Korver @ ~$5.75M) and what is scheduled to be 5 1sts on the roster (Nogueira; Schroeder; Cunningham; '14 1st; '15 1st)... so 8 players coming in around $32M before we get to 2nd round picks of which we should have some interesting ones and all of them on mini-level contracts. Assuming that Horford proves the masses of non-ATL fans correct and he's more of a #2/3 option and the PG doesn't develop a superstar (I do still have small hope for Teague here - he's so inconsistent right now that there's no telling where he'd settle in, and when he's on, his numbers are as good as anybody's), then I suspect we'll be shopping for a superstar again like we did this year in our failed attempt at CP3 and Howard. '15 is an interesting class with Rondo, LMA, B Lopez, M Gasol, and Hibbert (and I think the list I'm looking at doesn't include anyone with an option in previous years) looking to be the clear cut top of the class now, and we still have a couple of years for someone else to emerge.

At the time, it was commonly reported that SAS was "tanking" with Robinson out for the year. Sure, they racked up injuries even past Robinson, but they weren't attempting to fill the holes and weren't pushing their injured players to get back. Even at the time, there was some question at the national level about whether or not some of the players were laying out longer than what would be considered typically for the injury sustained. The "not so" secret was that, without Robinson, they weren't going far anyway so might as well get everyone back to 110% for a run the next season with Robinson and a top 5 pick in tow. I don't think that they thought that landing Duncan was a realistic possibility, but with a lottery, anything is possible.

[Jamaaliver]

If you can't get or create a superstar, then you hit the reset button and try again down the line.

I know it's early, but I'm drinking the Kool-Aid; Schroeder is our superstar.

The kid is nice. He has excelled against every level of competition to date. Now with actual NBA talent next to him, we could see Him as best PG in the league within the next 5 years....at age 25....in his PRIME!

[theatlfan]

If you can't get or create a superstar, then you hit the reset button and try again down the line.

I know it's early, but I'm drinking the Kool-Aid; Schroeder is our superstar.

The kid is nice. He has excelled against every level of competition to date. Now with actual NBA talent next to him, we could see I'm as best PG in the league within the next 5 years....at age 25....in his PRIME!

I'd love for it to be true, but I also don't want to put undue expectations on a 19 yo. H3ll, coming from Germany, what do you think the look on his face will be when someone attempts to explain to him that he can't legally buy a beer?

As of right now, since we're trying to create a superstar, he's probably the best pick albeit a little down the line with Horford also in the conversation and having a more immediate impact if he can step out from the shadows of JJ and Smoove and show some more. I also hold some hope for Teague, Nogueira, and Jenkins, but in all honesty, I'd be very happy if any of them settled into a consistent starter. After those 5 though, it really looks like future draft picks or '15 FA class.