Atlanta Hawks Official Trade Ideas Thread (Part 2)

[King Ken]

I would do this deal with Cleveland:

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yb5k62l6
Cleveland gets: Bazemore and Muscala
Atlanta gets: VC and Frye
Sac gets: Cleveland late 1st and Shumpert

We get what we want. Two expiring contracts. Kings get another 1st. Cavs get Bazemore and a shooting big man in Moose which replaces Frye plus adds more D and rebounding.

This gives us $53 million in cap space in 2018. This is an asset for one reason. If a team has a pick where we might value. We can take a terrible contract and add that pick without having to trade our assets. For example: Hornets got the 11th pick. They trade Walker for a high draft pick already. This opens up the door for us to take a contract like Batum's and get a player we might covet. Other than just that, we have the ability to get a player we covet in 2018 and if we can't, we look for someone in 2019. This gives us flexibility and a grand asset. Travis mentioned this numerous times how cap flexibility is critical to building a franchise.

Otherwise, I am not seeing the value of just making a trade, to make a trade.

[dms269]

Otherwise, I am not seeing the value of just making a trade, to make a trade.

It wouldn't be making a trade to make a trade, it is making a trade to improve our draft odds. We used to be solid in that first pick pre-lottery slot, now we are tied for 2nd. These games we should be losing are what is going to be end up costing us big. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that we could drop to 8 (3 games separate us and those at 17 wins.

[jayu70]

It appropriately says in the article though that the BKN pick isn't even on the table. Trading that pick for a player like Bazemore would be akin to GM suicide.

Altman can sell hanging onto the pick even if it ultimately angers James to the point where he'd leave. He absolutely cannot sell trading that pick for Bazemore.

I'd imagine they're trying to fleece us by selling the farce of Thompson or whoever else is acceptable value for our guys. A farce I'm sure not even gm-Budz would've fallen for.

Interesting smoke in that article though considering it's Aldridge reporting.

Exactly.
Cavs can't say they traded Kyrie for IT, Crowder and BAZEMORE. Lololol. Talk about losing a trade. (Especially if LeBron leaves).
Pipe dreams about the Brooklyn pick for Bazemore.

[ATL Boy]

Just saw the headline and immediately began speculating without reading the article.

So the question becomes what can Cleveland offer us for Bazemore?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[kg01]

Just saw the headline and immediately began speculating without reading the article.

So the question becomes what can Cleveland offer us for Bazemore?

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Shame .... Shame .... Shame ....

Kidding, I did the same thing but happened to see the quote someone else posted.

I think the trade is based on the assumption that we want to get out from under Baze's deal so we'll take back anything as long as it's less years/money than Baze's deal. IOW, as always, they expect us to bend over for the Cadavers.

[King Ken]

Otherwise, I am not seeing the value of just making a trade, to make a trade.

It wouldn't be making a trade to make a trade, it is making a trade to improve our draft odds. We used to be solid in that first pick pre-lottery slot, now we are tied for 2nd. These games we should be losing are what is going to be end up costing us big. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that we could drop to 8 (3 games separate us and those at 17 wins.

Jay knows me. She knows I am one of the biggest Hawks pro tankers there is of the last two seasons. But you don't trade just to make a trade. You trade for three reasons.

1. Improving your chances of success by plugging a hole.

2. Asset generating.

3. Toxic asset on the roster. Like Dwight Howard is at this stage of his career or a bad contract.

For Bazemore. We aren't contending or trying to make the playoffs so it's not #1. He been playing at his level and is a top 15 SG and a positive value overall for the team. Our only player playing at or above NBA starters level. So it's not 3.

2 is the only option.

If we can't get a deal that generates assets, I don't see it. Maybe if Cleveland had a mid 1st like Denver's or Philly's 1st and they wanted to move Shump with Frye. Fine. But a late 1st just isn't an asset for us who has about 3 of them in this draft alone and cap wise. We are due to have 24 million. We are fine cap wise.

As for tanking. That is on Bud. He going to have to lower minutes of the vets and play the youngins. That said, you don't trade productive players just to make a trade. That makes no sense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[King Ken]

Just saw the headline and immediately began speculating without reading the article.

So the question becomes what can Cleveland offer us for Bazemore?

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Shame .... Shame .... Shame ....

Kidding, I did the same thing but happened to see the quote someone else posted.

I think the trade is based on the assumption that we want to get out from under Baze's deal so we'll take back anything as long as it's less years/money than Baze's deal. IOW, as always, they expect us to bend over for the Cadavers.

This is pretty much it.

"Bazemore has a big deal, I remember last year it was a terrible deal. Atlanta bad so let us have him, we give you a trash smaller contract and that's good alright"

The issue with that logic is Bazemore was bad last year as a SF. This year as a SG, he finally playing within himself and unlike being a 40-50 ranked SF, he's been a clear top 10-15 range SG.

He was on a bad contract for what he was doing last year, not this year. This year, he is giving us what his contract shows.

If he was playing like he was last year, you wouldn't want him even for Shump. The reason why you want him is due to what he is doing now otherwise no one would touch him.

The problem with their logic is simple. They assume that we aren't in the business of trying to build a winning franchise and that we are here to help the teams that need it most. Some idiot tried to say, remember the Sheed deal. Why can't you guys do that again. I kid you not, I wanted to slap the **** out of the kid, I got so heated. Reminded me of how much I hated the old Hawks regime with a passion. So that's what other fans want from us.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[kg01]

Just saw the headline and immediately began speculating without reading the article.

So the question becomes what can Cleveland offer us for Bazemore?

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Shame .... Shame .... Shame ....

Kidding, I did the same thing but happened to see the quote someone else posted.

I think the trade is based on the assumption that we want to get out from under Baze's deal so we'll take back anything as long as it's less years/money than Baze's deal. IOW, as always, they expect us to bend over for the Cadavers.

This is pretty much it.

"Bazemore has a big deal, I remember last year it was a terrible deal. Atlanta bad so let us have him, we give you a trash smaller contract and that's good alright"

The issue with that logic is Bazemore was bad last year as a SF. This year as a SG, he finally playing within himself and unlike being a 40-50 ranked SF, he's been a clear top 10-15 range SG.

He was on a bad contract for what he was doing last year, not this year. This year, he is giving us what his contract shows.

If he was playing like he was last year, you wouldn't want him even for Shump. The reason why you want him is due to what he is doing now otherwise no one would touch him.

The problem with their logic is simple. They assume that we aren't in the business of trying to build a winning franchise and that we are here to help the teams that need it most. Some idiot tried to say, remember the Sheed deal. Why can't you guys do that again. I kid you not, I wanted to slap the **** out of the kid, I got so heated. Reminded me of how much I hated the old Hawks regime with a passion. So that's what other fans want from us.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Now this is the Supes -er- KangKen I know.

I get we're not a contender, never really have been in Atlanta. But we do not simply exist to facilitate other franchise's wants/needs.

I don't think it's an option but I so hope CLE gets desperate enough to make the mistake of trading that BKN pick for Bazemore.

Get 'em, KKen but don't be smackin' nobody ... well, other than that one guy .. I think he's a dolphins fan?

[King Ken]

Shame .... Shame .... Shame ....

Kidding, I did the same thing but happened to see the quote someone else posted.

I think the trade is based on the assumption that we want to get out from under Baze's deal so we'll take back anything as long as it's less years/money than Baze's deal. IOW, as always, they expect us to bend over for the Cadavers.

This is pretty much it.

"Bazemore has a big deal, I remember last year it was a terrible deal. Atlanta bad so let us have him, we give you a trash smaller contract and that's good alright"

The issue with that logic is Bazemore was bad last year as a SF. This year as a SG, he finally playing within himself and unlike being a 40-50 ranked SF, he's been a clear top 10-15 range SG.

He was on a bad contract for what he was doing last year, not this year. This year, he is giving us what his contract shows.

If he was playing like he was last year, you wouldn't want him even for Shump. The reason why you want him is due to what he is doing now otherwise no one would touch him.

The problem with their logic is simple. They assume that we aren't in the business of trying to build a winning franchise and that we are here to help the teams that need it most. Some idiot tried to say, remember the Sheed deal. Why can't you guys do that again. I kid you not, I wanted to slap the **** out of the kid, I got so heated. Reminded me of how much I hated the old Hawks regime with a passion. So that's what other fans want from us.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Now this is the Supes -er- KangKen I know.

I get we're not a contender, never really have been in Atlanta. But we do not simply exist to facilitate other franchise's wants/needs.

I don't think it's an option but I so hope CLE gets desperate enough to make the mistake of trading that BKN pick for Bazemore.

Get 'em, KKen but don't be smackin' nobody ... well, other than that one guy .. I think he's a dolphins fan?

Hilarious

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[dms269]

Otherwise, I am not seeing the value of just making a trade, to make a trade.

It wouldn't be making a trade to make a trade, it is making a trade to improve our draft odds. We used to be solid in that first pick pre-lottery slot, now we are tied for 2nd. These games we should be losing are what is going to be end up costing us big. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that we could drop to 8 (3 games separate us and those at 17 wins.

Jay knows me. She knows I am one of the biggest Hawks pro tankers there is of the last two seasons. But you don't trade just to make a trade. You trade for three reasons.

1. Improving your chances of success by plugging a hole.

2. Asset generating.

3. Toxic asset on the roster. Like Dwight Howard is at this stage of his career or a bad contract.

For Bazemore. We aren't contending or trying to make the playoffs so it's not #1. He been playing at his level and is a top 15 SG and a positive value overall for the team. Our only player playing at or above NBA starters level. So it's not 3.

2 is the only option.

If we can't get a deal that generates assets, I don't see it. Maybe if Cleveland had a mid 1st like Denver's or Philly's 1st and they wanted to move Shump with Frye. Fine. But a late 1st just isn't an asset for us who has about 3 of them in this draft alone and cap wise. We are due to have 24 million. We are fine cap wise.

As for tanking. That is on Bud. He going to have to lower minutes of the vets and play the youngins. That said, you don't trade productive players just to make a trade. That makes no sense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Bazemore is definitely #3. 18M per for the next 3, so he is overpaid. He is bad offensively and mediocre defensively. Even over his last several games he hasn't been good (including a -15 and a -21 in +/-). His only value is a team desperate enough for a late playoff rush and needs a backup 2/3.

You need to dump the vets for whatever you can get (likely 2nds). Holding on to them does nothing. You can't say that Bud needs to bench them while also saying we need to get a first for them. You aren't getting a first for a player who isn't playing.

BTW, there is no way that Bazemore is #1 worth his contract and #2 a top 15, let alone top 10 sg in the league.

[kg01]

It wouldn't be making a trade to make a trade, it is making a trade to improve our draft odds. We used to be solid in that first pick pre-lottery slot, now we are tied for 2nd. These games we should be losing are what is going to be end up costing us big. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that we could drop to 8 (3 games separate us and those at 17 wins.

Jay knows me. She knows I am one of the biggest Hawks pro tankers there is of the last two seasons. But you don't trade just to make a trade. You trade for three reasons.

1. Improving your chances of success by plugging a hole.

2. Asset generating.

3. Toxic asset on the roster. Like Dwight Howard is at this stage of his career or a bad contract.

For Bazemore. We aren't contending or trying to make the playoffs so it's not #1. He been playing at his level and is a top 15 SG and a positive value overall for the team. Our only player playing at or above NBA starters level. So it's not 3.

2 is the only option.

If we can't get a deal that generates assets, I don't see it. Maybe if Cleveland had a mid 1st like Denver's or Philly's 1st and they wanted to move Shump with Frye. Fine. But a late 1st just isn't an asset for us who has about 3 of them in this draft alone and cap wise. We are due to have 24 million. We are fine cap wise.

As for tanking. That is on Bud. He going to have to lower minutes of the vets and play the youngins. That said, you don't trade productive players just to make a trade. That makes no sense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Bazemore is definitely #3. 18M per for the next 3, so he is overpaid. He is bad offensively and mediocre defensively. Even over his last several games he hasn't been good (including a -15 and a -21 in +/-). His only value is a team desperate enough for a late playoff rush and needs a backup 2/3.

You need to dump the vets for whatever you can get (likely 2nds). Holding on to them does nothing. You can't say that Bud needs to bench them while also saying we need to get a first for them. You aren't getting a first for a player who isn't playing.

BTW, there is no way that Bazemore is #1 worth his contract and #2 a top 15, let alone top 10 sg in the league.

I respeckfully disagree.

The sticking point is you seem to be viewing Bazemore in the lens of the ill-fated attempt to play him as a 3. In which case you'd be totally right.

As a 2G, and in a role further down the scouting report, he's well worth his contract. That's the spot he'd be in as a Cav thus he is indeed 'worth' that deal. Both his defense and his shot/scoring get better when surrounded by better players. And, at the end of the day in 2018 NBA, $18mil/per is par for a starting 2.

Even this year, now being played as a 2G, that deal is nowhere near as bad as it was last year when he was being miscast as a starting 3.

[Spud2nique]

Otherwise, I am not seeing the value of just making a trade, to make a trade.

It wouldn't be making a trade to make a trade, it is making a trade to improve our draft odds. We used to be solid in that first pick pre-lottery slot, now we are tied for 2nd. These games we should be losing are what is going to be end up costing us big. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that we could drop to 8 (3 games separate us and those at 17 wins.

Jay knows me. She knows I am one of the biggest Hawks pro tankers there is of the last two seasons. But you don't trade just to make a trade. You trade for three reasons.

1. Improving your chances of success by plugging a hole.

2. Asset generating.

3. Toxic asset on the roster. Like Dwight Howard is at this stage of his career or a bad contract.

For Bazemore. We aren't contending or trying to make the playoffs so it's not #1. He been playing at his level and is a top 15 SG and a positive value overall for the team. Our only player playing at or above NBA starters level. So it's not 3.

2 is the only option.

If we can't get a deal that generates assets, I don't see it. Maybe if Cleveland had a mid 1st like Denver's or Philly's 1st and they wanted to move Shump with Frye. Fine. But a late 1st just isn't an asset for us who has about 3 of them in this draft alone and cap wise. We are due to have 24 million. We are fine cap wise.

As for tanking. That is on Bud. He going to have to lower minutes of the vets and play the youngins. That said, you don't trade productive players just to make a trade. That makes no sense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I agree that you don't make a trade just to make a trade...but like you said you're a pro tanker (and everybody knows it) so why wouldn't you want to dump Baze for the best deal possible...let the market set your price. Right now the market screams another late 1st for Baze.

[King Ken]

It wouldn't be making a trade to make a trade, it is making a trade to improve our draft odds. We used to be solid in that first pick pre-lottery slot, now we are tied for 2nd. These games we should be losing are what is going to be end up costing us big. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that we could drop to 8 (3 games separate us and those at 17 wins.

Jay knows me. She knows I am one of the biggest Hawks pro tankers there is of the last two seasons. But you don't trade just to make a trade. You trade for three reasons.

1. Improving your chances of success by plugging a hole.

2. Asset generating.

3. Toxic asset on the roster. Like Dwight Howard is at this stage of his career or a bad contract.

For Bazemore. We aren't contending or trying to make the playoffs so it's not #1. He been playing at his level and is a top 15 SG and a positive value overall for the team. Our only player playing at or above NBA starters level. So it's not 3.

2 is the only option.

If we can't get a deal that generates assets, I don't see it. Maybe if Cleveland had a mid 1st like Denver's or Philly's 1st and they wanted to move Shump with Frye. Fine. But a late 1st just isn't an asset for us who has about 3 of them in this draft alone and cap wise. We are due to have 24 million. We are fine cap wise.

As for tanking. That is on Bud. He going to have to lower minutes of the vets and play the youngins. That said, you don't trade productive players just to make a trade. That makes no sense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Bazemore is definitely #3. 18M per for the next 3, so he is overpaid. He is bad offensively and mediocre defensively. Even over his last several games he hasn't been good (including a -15 and a -21 in +/-). His only value is a team desperate enough for a late playoff rush and needs a backup 2/3.

You need to dump the vets for whatever you can get (likely 2nds). Holding on to them does nothing. You can't say that Bud needs to bench them while also saying we need to get a first for them. You aren't getting a first for a player who isn't playing.

BTW, there is no way that Bazemore is #1 worth his contract and #2 a top 15, let alone top 10 sg in the league.

The data here is wrong. Kent has been +1, +13 and -15 in the last three games

Defensively, he solid. He plays good off ball defense. His on ball d has always been questionable as he can be over aggressive. Offensively, he has been sound of the last 25-30 games. We are better with him then without him on both sides of the court
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[dms269]

Jay knows me. She knows I am one of the biggest Hawks pro tankers there is of the last two seasons. But you don't trade just to make a trade. You trade for three reasons.

1. Improving your chances of success by plugging a hole.

2. Asset generating.

3. Toxic asset on the roster. Like Dwight Howard is at this stage of his career or a bad contract.

For Bazemore. We aren't contending or trying to make the playoffs so it's not #1. He been playing at his level and is a top 15 SG and a positive value overall for the team. Our only player playing at or above NBA starters level. So it's not 3.

2 is the only option.

If we can't get a deal that generates assets, I don't see it. Maybe if Cleveland had a mid 1st like Denver's or Philly's 1st and they wanted to move Shump with Frye. Fine. But a late 1st just isn't an asset for us who has about 3 of them in this draft alone and cap wise. We are due to have 24 million. We are fine cap wise.

As for tanking. That is on Bud. He going to have to lower minutes of the vets and play the youngins. That said, you don't trade productive players just to make a trade. That makes no sense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Bazemore is definitely #3. 18M per for the next 3, so he is overpaid. He is bad offensively and mediocre defensively. Even over his last several games he hasn't been good (including a -15 and a -21 in +/-). His only value is a team desperate enough for a late playoff rush and needs a backup 2/3.

You need to dump the vets for whatever you can get (likely 2nds). Holding on to them does nothing. You can't say that Bud needs to bench them while also saying we need to get a first for them. You aren't getting a first for a player who isn't playing.

BTW, there is no way that Bazemore is #1 worth his contract and #2 a top 15, let alone top 10 sg in the league.

The data here is wrong. Kent has been +1, +13 and -15 in the last three games

Defensively, he solid. He plays good off ball defense. His on ball d has always been questionable as he can be over aggressive. Offensively, he has been sound of the last 25-30 games. We are better with him then without him on both sides of the court
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

The data is not wrong. Let's look at his last 10 games (I will include the Utah game, even though basketball reference did not have it up when I posted my comment).
1/22: +13
1/20: +1
1/17: +1
1/15: -7
1/12: -2
1/10: -10
1/8: 0
1/7: -21
1/5: 0
1/2: +3

So over those last 10 games he is net -22. Over his last 20 he is -12 (which includes games of +17, +13, and +9). He has went back down over these last 10.

He has been better this year than last, but that doesn't make him a great or good basketball player. He is good defensively, and mediocre offensively. TS% and offensive +/- all confirm that.

If we are better with him than without him, then we should be trying to trade him. He won't return a high draft pick, but if we could trade him for expiring and maybe a late first (that is up for debate), I say you pull the trigger. It opens up even more salary (not necessarily for this year but for next) and might give us a late pick (I know you say we have enough, but I'd rather have the pick for a possible move up).

[King Ken]

Bazemore is definitely #3. 18M per for the next 3, so he is overpaid. He is bad offensively and mediocre defensively. Even over his last several games he hasn't been good (including a -15 and a -21 in +/-). His only value is a team desperate enough for a late playoff rush and needs a backup 2/3.

You need to dump the vets for whatever you can get (likely 2nds). Holding on to them does nothing. You can't say that Bud needs to bench them while also saying we need to get a first for them. You aren't getting a first for a player who isn't playing.

BTW, there is no way that Bazemore is #1 worth his contract and #2 a top 15, let alone top 10 sg in the league.

The data here is wrong. Kent has been +1, +13 and -15 in the last three games

Defensively, he solid. He plays good off ball defense. His on ball d has always been questionable as he can be over aggressive. Offensively, he has been sound of the last 25-30 games. We are better with him then without him on both sides of the court
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

The data is not wrong. Let's look at his last 10 games (I will include the Utah game, even though basketball reference did not have it up when I posted my comment).
1/22: +13
1/20: +1
1/17: +1
1/15: -7
1/12: -2
1/10: -10
1/8: 0
1/7: -21
1/5: 0
1/2: +3

So over those last 10 games he is net -22. Over his last 20 he is -12 (which includes games of +17, +13, and +9). He has went back down over these last 10.

He has been better this year than last, but that doesn't make him a great or good basketball player. He is good defensively, and mediocre offensively. TS% and offensive +/- all confirm that.

If we are better with him than without him, then we should be trying to trade him. He won't return a high draft pick, but if we could trade him for expiring and maybe a late first (that is up for debate), I say you pull the trigger. It opens up even more salary (not necessarily for this year but for next) and might give us a late pick (I know you say we have enough, but I'd rather have the pick for a possible move up).

You proved that your initial data was wrong. Thats why you changed up your inital post while cosigning me. That said, defense wise, he's been better than the numbers suggest. Dennis getting killed off the ball seems to harm everyone around him numbers. Baze is not exempt from that

This is a really good plus/minus considering how bad our team is. Especially if you look at the charts from the last two months.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[dms269]

The data here is wrong. Kent has been +1, +13 and -15 in the last three games

Defensively, he solid. He plays good off ball defense. His on ball d has always been questionable as he can be over aggressive. Offensively, he has been sound of the last 25-30 games. We are better with him then without him on both sides of the court
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

The data is not wrong. Let's look at his last 10 games (I will include the Utah game, even though basketball reference did not have it up when I posted my comment).
1/22: +13
1/20: +1
1/17: +1
1/15: -7
1/12: -2
1/10: -10
1/8: 0
1/7: -21
1/5: 0
1/2: +3

So over those last 10 games he is net -22. Over his last 20 he is -12 (which includes games of +17, +13, and +9). He has went back down over these last 10.

He has been better this year than last, but that doesn't make him a great or good basketball player. He is good defensively, and mediocre offensively. TS% and offensive +/- all confirm that.

If we are better with him than without him, then we should be trying to trade him. He won't return a high draft pick, but if we could trade him for expiring and maybe a late first (that is up for debate), I say you pull the trigger. It opens up even more salary (not necessarily for this year but for next) and might give us a late pick (I know you say we have enough, but I'd rather have the pick for a possible move up).

You proved that your initial data was wrong. Thats why you changed up your inital post while cosigning me. That said, defense wise, he's been better than the numbers suggest. Dennis getting killed off the ball seems to harm everyone around him numbers. Baze is not exempt from that

This is a really good plus/minus considering how bad our team is. Especially if you look at the charts from the last two months.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Actually you are correct, the data I found is wrong...but not in the way you have hoped. The 1/20 game against Chicago he was -15. So that means his net +/- over the last 10 games was actually -40. The correct data is:
1/22: +13
1/20: -15
1/17: +1
1/15: +1
1/12: -7
1/10: -2
1/8: -10
1/7: 0
1/5: -21
1/2: 0
source: https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bazemke01/gamelog/2018

I had the wrong +/- on certain days (what I get for trying to do split screen and having to scroll back and forth). My initial post data is not wrong. He hasn't been good over his last several games (10 as a sample, being -40 plus/minus and only 3 games being positive and 1 over +1). He does in fact have two games of double-digit negative +/-.

I just don't see what the point is in keeping him. Do we really think his value is much more than a late first? Teams want defense, but his lack of offense and the contract limits who we can ship him to. If we keep him for next year when he is on a 1+1 deal (which he would be an idiot not to accept that 3rd player option year), does he really have the capability of rebounding his value on a team who is rebuilding? He does have more value to a team that is in the hunt, but that doesn't mean we draw a line in the sand and squander any hope we have of getting something out of him. Just like with the vets, I understand wanting to keep them because we feel their value is more. But at the end of the day I would rather some type of asset (young player, a 2nd, ect) for a player who doesn't have a future with the Atlanta Hawks than lose them for nothing.

[macd-gm]

Not to jump in the middle here but cumulative +/- doesn't really mean anything on a tanking team. Having a big negative just means you are playing a lot on a team that is losing a lot. Baze has the 4th worst +/- on the team behind Dennis/ Marco/ Prince. Not a single rotation player on the Hawks has a positive +/-

[Spud2nique]

Not to jump in the middle here but cumulative +/- doesn't really mean anything on a tanking team. Having a big negative just means you are playing a lot on a team that is losing a lot. Baze has the 4th worst +/- on the team behind Dennis/ Marco/ Prince. Not a single rotation player on the Hawks has a positive +/-

Agreed...you can calculate and crunch numbers all day long but I don't think it's significant as much in a tanking situation.

[jayu70]

Baze talks trade deadline:

Read on Twitter

“When is it?” Hawks guard Kent Bazemore said today.
It’s Feb. 8.
“Oh,” Bazemore said, laughing. “I had no idea, man.”
Clearly Bazemore isn’t focused on the pending deadline. However, Bazemore is aware that he’s included among the inevitable trade rumors.

Bazemore, 28, said he prefers to stay with the Hawks but understands trades are part of the business. He knows from personal experience: the Warriors traded him to the Lakers in February 2014, before he was an established NBA player.
“It is what it is,” Bazemore said. “I’ve had great vets around me coming up that have kind of warned me and prepared me for situations like this. But it’s out of my control.”

There have been times this season when Bazemore has seemed worn down by the losing. But he said that, on balance, it’s been a positive experience.
“I love going through this,” Bazemore said. “I think this helped me as a person. And as a player (it) thrust (me) into a role that maybe would have come a year or two from now. It’s a lot of learning on the fly. Growing pains for myself. Trial and error.”
For his part, Bazemore said he wants to stay in Atlanta. Pretty much every player says that publicly when connected to trade rumors but there’s reason to believe Bazemore is being sincere.

[macd-gm]

It's going to be interesting to see how Bud feels about trading Baze. Of course I never thought he'd trade Kyle.