How many Atlanta Hawks teams are better than 2021?

[Dr Positivity]

The Hawks since move to Atlanta have had many 2nd round caliber teams but not contenders. You could argue the current version is actually one of their best teams. Other solid teams

2015 - Bud, Horford, Millsap, Korver, etc.
2010 - Joe Johnson, Horford, Josh Smith etc.
1997 - Mutombo, Blaylock, Steve Smith, etc.
1994 - Blaylock, Willis, Manning - I never understood why they traded Wilkens halfway on a great team
1987 - Nique, Willis, Rivers, etc.
1980 - Don't know much about this team but Rollins, Eddie Johnson, Roundfield, John Drew, Hubie coach
1973 - Hudson, Maravich, Bellamy, etc.

[prolific passer]

94 with a prime Willis, Mookie, and Augmon and still a good Nique putting up 24.4ppg. Should have never traded him.

[Owly]

1994 - Blaylock, Willis, Manning - I never understood why they traded Wilkens [sic] halfway on a great team

Combination of what I've heard and interpreted
1) Wilkins' contract was expiring and they didn't want to pay what they thought he wanted.
2) He was showing some signs of decline (ts% [and rts%] down).
3) Somewhat related to 2 and 4 - a feeling he was forcing his offense in Atlanta rather than giving Lenny Wilkens's offense a chance but was less able to finish (I know this seems like two points, I'm paraphrasing a source, presumably if he were finishing better he could justify the iso stuff is the link)
4) Feeling that Manning was more of a complimentary piece, one who "made others better" and thus a better fit.
5) He wasn't driving the team's goodness. Mookie Blaylock who, on limited data may have been an impact monster and a career year from Augmon have the strongest evidence of impact.
6) Manning was 6 and 1/3 years younger - a more viable long-term investment.

Don't know if all of it is fair (and don't know 1 is what Atlanta thought, but seems likely).

I understand if it ain't broke but don't mind teams taking a swing and think enough of the above is true for it to make sense ... the issue, at least in the RS, is that Manning played very poorly in Atlanta (nor great in LA that year but he got worse in Atlanta, though playing well in the playoffs, but Willis injury - torn ligament in left thumb and all other players' bad shooting versus Indiana did them in). Then Manning doesn't stay either (Atlanta/Wilkens might not have liked him saying Atlanta weren't a championship team in some court testimony about the salary cap - the presumed knowledge that he'd be "looked after" in Phoenix after taking a low dollar one year contract with the Suns - in addition to his play and likely salary requests being possible factors).


Re this year it depends on how much you weight the McMillan spell and believe the improvement is real.
By my reckoning even if you think the caliber of play improvement is real and sustainable, by my reckoning McMillan went 8-1 in games divided by 5 points or fewer, which is typically more a luck thing than a being good thing. So W-L overstates the improvement.

Facing the Knicks and now maybe a limited Embiid they're looking at a good opportunity to go deep but insofar as it's true that this is a notably good Atlanta that would be more a comment on the franchise's lack of top end teams.

[prolific passer]

1994 - Blaylock, Willis, Manning - I never understood why they traded Wilkens [sic] halfway on a great team

Combination of what I've heard and interpreted
1) Wilkins' contract was expiring and they didn't want to pay what they thought he wanted.
2) He was showing some signs of decline (ts% [and rts%] down).
3) Somewhat related to 2 and 4 - a feeling he was forcing his offense in Atlanta rather than giving Lenny Wilkens's offense a chance but was less able to finish (I know this seems like two points, I'm paraphrasing a source, presumably if he were finishing better he could justify the iso stuff is the link)
4) Feeling that Manning was more of a complimentary piece, one who "made others better" and thus a better fit.
5) He wasn't driving the team's goodness. Mookie Blaylock who, on limited data may have been an impact monster and a career year from Augmon have the strongest evidence of impact.
6) Manning was 6 and 1/3 years younger - a more viable long-term investment.

Don't know if all of it is fair (and don't know 1 is what Atlanta thought, but seems likely).

I understand if it ain't broke but don't mind teams taking a swing and think enough of the above is true for it to make sense ... the issue, at least in the RS, is that Manning played very poorly in Atlanta (nor great in LA that year but he got worse in Atlanta, though playing well in the playoffs, but Willis injury - torn ligament in left thumb and all other players' bad shooting versus Indiana did them in). Then Manning doesn't stay either (Atlanta/Wilkens might not have liked him saying Atlanta weren't a championship team in some court testimony about the salary cap - the presumed knowledge that he'd be "looked after" in Phoenix after taking a low dollar one year contract with the Suns - in addition to his play and likely salary requests being possible factors).


Re this year it depends on how much you weight the McMillan spell and believe the improvement is real.
By my reckoning even if you think the caliber of play improvement is real and sustainable, by my reckoning McMillan went 8-1 in games divided by 5 points or fewer, which is typically more a luck thing than a being good thing. So W-L overstates the improvement.

Facing the Knicks and now maybe a limited Embiid they're looking at a good opportunity to go deep but insofar as it's true that this is a notably good Atlanta that would be more a comment on the franchise's lack of top end teams.

I think Manning had it in his mind to go Phoenix no matter what in the offseason. Just another what if or missed opportunity in the sports world.

Is Trae going to be able to join Tiny and become the 2nd player to lead the league in scoring and assists in the same season? Could Steph have done what Trae has been doing the last 2 years if given the opportunity in terms of scoring and assists?

[Owly]

1994 - Blaylock, Willis, Manning - I never understood why they traded Wilkens [sic] halfway on a great team

Combination of what I've heard and interpreted
1) Wilkins' contract was expiring and they didn't want to pay what they thought he wanted.
2) He was showing some signs of decline (ts% [and rts%] down).
3) Somewhat related to 2 and 4 - a feeling he was forcing his offense in Atlanta rather than giving Lenny Wilkens's offense a chance but was less able to finish (I know this seems like two points, I'm paraphrasing a source, presumably if he were finishing better he could justify the iso stuff is the link)
4) Feeling that Manning was more of a complimentary piece, one who "made others better" and thus a better fit.
5) He wasn't driving the team's goodness. Mookie Blaylock who, on limited data may have been an impact monster and a career year from Augmon have the strongest evidence of impact.
6) Manning was 6 and 1/3 years younger - a more viable long-term investment.

Don't know if all of it is fair (and don't know 1 is what Atlanta thought, but seems likely).

I understand if it ain't broke but don't mind teams taking a swing and think enough of the above is true for it to make sense ... the issue, at least in the RS, is that Manning played very poorly in Atlanta (nor great in LA that year but he got worse in Atlanta, though playing well in the playoffs, but Willis injury - torn ligament in left thumb and all other players' bad shooting versus Indiana did them in). Then Manning doesn't stay either (Atlanta/Wilkens might not have liked him saying Atlanta weren't a championship team in some court testimony about the salary cap - the presumed knowledge that he'd be "looked after" in Phoenix after taking a low dollar one year contract with the Suns - in addition to his play and likely salary requests being possible factors).


Re this year it depends on how much you weight the McMillan spell and believe the improvement is real.
By my reckoning even if you think the caliber of play improvement is real and sustainable, by my reckoning McMillan went 8-1 in games divided by 5 points or fewer, which is typically more a luck thing than a being good thing. So W-L overstates the improvement.

Facing the Knicks and now maybe a limited Embiid they're looking at a good opportunity to go deep but insofar as it's true that this is a notably good Atlanta that would be more a comment on the franchise's lack of top end teams.

I think Manning had it in his mind to go Phoenix no matter what in the offseason. Just another what if or missed opportunity in the sports world.

Is Trae going to be able to join Tiny and become the 2nd player to lead the league in scoring and assists in the same season? Could Steph have done what Trae has been doing the last 2 years if given the opportunity in terms of scoring and assists?

Any source on Manning? I know he was vocal that he wasn't going to stay with the Clippers, and the Phoenix deal was likely done before it was officially confirmed (some offseason publications going to print with Manning as "likely" or presumed Sun). But not that Suns over Hawks was a "no matter" far in advance. Cheers.

Also the ("only") Tiny thing is only technically and officially true, Robertson ('68) did it by the present measurement (per game) but misses out on acknowledgement because official points leader at the time was on raw totals not averages.

[migya]

1994 - Blaylock, Willis, Manning - I never understood why they traded Wilkens [sic] halfway on a great team

Combination of what I've heard and interpreted
1) Wilkins' contract was expiring and they didn't want to pay what they thought he wanted.
2) He was showing some signs of decline (ts% [and rts%] down).
3) Somewhat related to 2 and 4 - a feeling he was forcing his offense in Atlanta rather than giving Lenny Wilkens's offense a chance but was less able to finish (I know this seems like two points, I'm paraphrasing a source, presumably if he were finishing better he could justify the iso stuff is the link)
4) Feeling that Manning was more of a complimentary piece, one who "made others better" and thus a better fit.
5) He wasn't driving the team's goodness. Mookie Blaylock who, on limited data may have been an impact monster and a career year from Augmon have the strongest evidence of impact.
6) Manning was 6 and 1/3 years younger - a more viable long-term investment.

Don't know if all of it is fair (and don't know 1 is what Atlanta thought, but seems likely).

I understand if it ain't broke but don't mind teams taking a swing and think enough of the above is true for it to make sense ... the issue, at least in the RS, is that Manning played very poorly in Atlanta (nor great in LA that year but he got worse in Atlanta, though playing well in the playoffs, but Willis injury - torn ligament in left thumb and all other players' bad shooting versus Indiana did them in). Then Manning doesn't stay either (Atlanta/Wilkens might not have liked him saying Atlanta weren't a championship team in some court testimony about the salary cap - the presumed knowledge that he'd be "looked after" in Phoenix after taking a low dollar one year contract with the Suns - in addition to his play and likely salary requests being possible factors).


Re this year it depends on how much you weight the McMillan spell and believe the improvement is real.
By my reckoning even if you think the caliber of play improvement is real and sustainable, by my reckoning McMillan went 8-1 in games divided by 5 points or fewer, which is typically more a luck thing than a being good thing. So W-L overstates the improvement.

Facing the Knicks and now maybe a limited Embiid they're looking at a good opportunity to go deep but insofar as it's true that this is a notably good Atlanta that would be more a comment on the franchise's lack of top end teams.

I remember or was pretty close to that. Wilkins was aging and didn't fit as well as Manning. Atlanta retooled really well and lucked into getting Mutombo.

[prolific passer]

1994 - Blaylock, Willis, Manning - I never understood why they traded Wilkens [sic] halfway on a great team

Combination of what I've heard and interpreted
1) Wilkins' contract was expiring and they didn't want to pay what they thought he wanted.
2) He was showing some signs of decline (ts% [and rts%] down).
3) Somewhat related to 2 and 4 - a feeling he was forcing his offense in Atlanta rather than giving Lenny Wilkens's offense a chance but was less able to finish (I know this seems like two points, I'm paraphrasing a source, presumably if he were finishing better he could justify the iso stuff is the link)
4) Feeling that Manning was more of a complimentary piece, one who "made others better" and thus a better fit.
5) He wasn't driving the team's goodness. Mookie Blaylock who, on limited data may have been an impact monster and a career year from Augmon have the strongest evidence of impact.
6) Manning was 6 and 1/3 years younger - a more viable long-term investment.

Don't know if all of it is fair (and don't know 1 is what Atlanta thought, but seems likely).

I understand if it ain't broke but don't mind teams taking a swing and think enough of the above is true for it to make sense ... the issue, at least in the RS, is that Manning played very poorly in Atlanta (nor great in LA that year but he got worse in Atlanta, though playing well in the playoffs, but Willis injury - torn ligament in left thumb and all other players' bad shooting versus Indiana did them in). Then Manning doesn't stay either (Atlanta/Wilkens might not have liked him saying Atlanta weren't a championship team in some court testimony about the salary cap - the presumed knowledge that he'd be "looked after" in Phoenix after taking a low dollar one year contract with the Suns - in addition to his play and likely salary requests being possible factors).


Re this year it depends on how much you weight the McMillan spell and believe the improvement is real.
By my reckoning even if you think the caliber of play improvement is real and sustainable, by my reckoning McMillan went 8-1 in games divided by 5 points or fewer, which is typically more a luck thing than a being good thing. So W-L overstates the improvement.

Facing the Knicks and now maybe a limited Embiid they're looking at a good opportunity to go deep but insofar as it's true that this is a notably good Atlanta that would be more a comment on the franchise's lack of top end teams.

I remember or was pretty close to that. Wilkins was aging and didn't fit as well as Manning. Atlanta retooled really well and lucked into getting Mutombo.

Yeah they got Deke a few years later but they might have cost them a championship with that trade due to missing Nique's ability to score when needed.
As for the other teams 87 was in contention for the top seed in the east till the east day of regular season when they lost to the celtics.
97 of course had Deke, Smith, and Mookie but I think Laettner made an all star team that year. Laettner was solid but overshadowed by Shaq, Zo, and Sprewell in the 92 draft.
Josh Smith was a stat sheet filler during his prime. Just gave you a little of everything.
The early 70s ones were pretty loaded with the likes of Bellamy, Bridges, Hudson, and Maravich but seemed to underachieved.

Still probably all of them would beat this current Hawks team due to their talent alone.

[TheBomb81]

94 with a prime Willis, Mookie, and Augmon and still a good Nique putting up 24.4ppg. Should have never traded him.

They were idiot for getting rid of Nique.

[TheBomb81]

94 with a prime Willis, Mookie, and Augmon and still a good Nique putting up 24.4ppg. Should have never traded him.

They were idiots for getting rid of Nique.

[TheBomb81]

All those teams were better than the current Hawks team.

[prolific passer]

94 with a prime Willis, Mookie, and Augmon and still a good Nique putting up 24.4ppg. Should have never traded him.

They were idiots for getting rid of Nique.

Yes they were. The small forwards that were set up for them would have been perfect for Nique to really feast on in Rice, McKey, Charles Smith, and Robert Horry but oh well. At least they Mutombo a few years later and got a few 4 seeds.