What would you do with the Hawks?

[PhoSita]

Every team should be building to a contender (or be one). 

That's just not how it works, though, and I can understand why.  In truth, I think most teams are building to achieve a sustained period of success, pretty much 50+ wins multiple seasons in a row.

It's just too all-or-nothing otherwise.  Truly building to contend means you've got to be willing to engage in extreme measures, a la Hinkie, and good luck keeping your job if it doesn't immediately pay dividends.  Any team that doesn't go full Hinkie, if they're being honest, would acknowledge that there are considerations apart from simply doing everything to try and get the next all-time great.

Because that's what you need to contend.  Contending pretty much requires having a top 10 player, and usually requires another top 20-30 player in addition to that.

I think if you don't have the great fortune to draft an MVP caliber, generational talent, then it makes sense to try and build a team kind of like the Hawks or Grizzlies.  A team that can win 50-55 games or so for an extended period of time. 

Maybe you never get past the Conference Finals, but maybe one of your prospects busts out or you get really lucky one year and make it all the way to the Finals.  Maybe you even win a title, like the 2011 Mavericks (although Dirk was a MVP type player once).

[Moranis]

Breakdown of all teams as currently constructed (assuming full health).  A core member is a guy that would be a top 2 level player on a title team.

TRUE CONTENDERS
Cavs
Warriors, Spurs, Thunder

HAVE TWO OR MORE PLAYERS THAT CAN BE A CORE MEMBER OF A CONTENDER
Raptors, Heat, Pistons, Wizards, Bucks, Knicks
Clippers, Jazz, Timberwolves

HAVE AT LEAST ONE PLAYER THAT CAN BE A CORE MEMBER OF A CONTENDER
Hornets, Pacers, Bulls
Blazers, Grizzlies, Rockets, Kings, Pelicans

HAVE PLAYER(S)/ASSETS THAT MIGHT BE CORE MEMBERS OR COULD BE TRADED FOR CORE MEMBERS (i.e. too early to tell how good said players will be)
Celtics, Magic, Sixers
Nuggets, Suns, Lakers

TEAMS THAT ARE STUCK
Hawks, Nets
Mavericks

[PhoSita]

How are you defining core member of a contender?

Because for me Millsap is absolutely good enough to be top 2 on a contender.

Horford would make an excellent #3 pretty much anywhere (imagine him in place of Ibaka, for example).


It's hard to see how the Hawks will ever get the #1 guy they need, no doubt about that.

But again, I think there are a lot of teams leaguewide who would kill to be in the Hawks' position.  The Kings would be thrilled to have a roster and coach set up to win 45-55 games and at least one playoff series for at least the next 2-3 years, if not longer.

[Moranis]

How are you defining core member of a contender?

Because for me Millsap is absolutely good enough to be top 2 on a contender.

Horford would make an excellent #3 pretty much anywhere (imagine him in place of Ibaka, for example).


It's hard to see how the Hawks will ever get the #1 guy they need, no doubt about that.

But again, I think there are a lot of teams leaguewide who would kill to be in the Hawks' position.  The Kings would be thrilled to have a roster and coach set up to win 45-55 games and at least one playoff series for at least the next 2-3 years, if not longer.

I don't think Milsap is that good or the Hawks would be much better.  I don't consider #3 guys core members.  They aren't a dime a dozen, but they aren't that hard to find either.  If you don't have a #1, but have three #2's you should be a true contender or you don't really have three #2's.  The Hawks just aren't there (they were closer last year, but you saw what happened when they played a real contender and that was without Love and Irving barely playing).  Now if Milsap and Horford were more in line with Teague's age, then the Hawks would be in a different position, but Milsap and Horford are only going to get worse and they aren't a contender right now. 

The Hawks have no reasonable way to becoming a contender outside of signing a #1 type guy in free agency.  That isn't a realistic plan because those guys rarely leave and when they do, virtually the entire league pursues them.  That means that isn't an actual plan on getting better.

[PhoSita]

We just disagree on this, both in terms of the players involved and the big picture philosophy.

I don't think the Hawks will blow it up, and I think there are good reasons for that.

But hey, maybe they'll go full-on firesale and be the Sixers for 4-5 years.  Could happen, I guess.

[Moranis]

We just disagree on this, both in terms of the players involved and the big picture philosophy.

I don't think the Hawks will blow it up, and I think there are good reasons for that.

But hey, maybe they'll go full-on firesale and be the Sixers for 4-5 years.  Could happen, I guess.

Oh I don't think they will blow it up, I think they should.  Big difference.  Too much money involved by being a playoff team for the owner to go in that direction.

Let us not forget that Atlanta won 60 games last year and got swept by a team whose 2nd and 3rd best players played a total of 2 games (out of 8 possible i.e. 4 for Irving and 4 for Love) and just 49 minutes total.  Atlanta has some nice players, they don't have championship core level players and their two best players are only going to get worse as time goes on (as a result of age and injuries).

[celticsclay]

We just disagree on this, both in terms of the players involved and the big picture philosophy.

I don't think the Hawks will blow it up, and I think there are good reasons for that.

But hey, maybe they'll go full-on firesale and be the Sixers for 4-5 years.  Could happen, I guess.

Oh I don't think they will blow it up, I think they should.  Big difference.  Too much money involved by being a playoff team for the owner to go in that direction.

Let us not forget that Atlanta won 60 games last year and got swept by a team whose 2nd and 3rd best players played a total of 2 games (out of 8 possible i.e. 4 for Irving and 4 for Love) and just 49 minutes total.  Atlanta has some nice players, they don't have championship core level players and their two best players are only going to get worse as time goes on (as a result of age and injuries).

I think what kind of stinks for them is that it seemed like Teague had a chance of being a better player than it looks like he will turn out to be. He has a lot of tools, but just can't seem to put it all together to be an all-star year in and year out. If they Kylie Lowry instead of him I think they would at a very least had an extremely close matchup versus the Cavs. I also will add, as easy as it is to call it a complete mismatch because of the sweep, that series very easily could still be going on. There was certainly an element of luck with how many contested 3's the Cavs hit over the course of the series and in 3 of the 4 games they had a lead at some point in the 4th quarter. They absolutely should have won 3 and were obviously right there in game 4. It is interesting to see how differently we would be talking about things if there were a few different bounces.

[LooseCannon]

Millsap has a legitimate argument for being the best big in the NBA this season.  Not sure how anyone intelligent can think he isn't good enough to be the second-best player on a title team.  Do people just look at his height and not understand that he was very deserving of his 5th place finish in DPOY voting?  Is it because he's never had a 20 PPG season?

[PhoSita]

We just disagree on this, both in terms of the players involved and the big picture philosophy.

I don't think the Hawks will blow it up, and I think there are good reasons for that.

But hey, maybe they'll go full-on firesale and be the Sixers for 4-5 years.  Could happen, I guess.

Oh I don't think they will blow it up, I think they should.  Big difference.  Too much money involved by being a playoff team for the owner to go in that direction.

Let us not forget that Atlanta won 60 games last year and got swept by a team whose 2nd and 3rd best players played a total of 2 games (out of 8 possible i.e. 4 for Irving and 4 for Love) and just 49 minutes total.  Atlanta has some nice players, they don't have championship core level players and their two best players are only going to get worse as time goes on (as a result of age and injuries).

I'm just arguing for a middle ground perspective here.  I think there are goals worth pursuing apart from fielding a top 4 or 5 team with a substantial likelihood of winning a title.

Especially if you're in a market like Atlanta, it's just so hard to reach that point.  It probably only happens if you're lucky enough to get the top pick in a draft with a generational talent.  Otherwise, you're hoping to find the next Steph Curry, Paul George, or Dirk Nowitzki in the second half of the lottery.

I really don't know if you can "plan" to end up with that kind of player, especially if you have a small market team with very little appeal to free agents.

[Moranis]

We just disagree on this, both in terms of the players involved and the big picture philosophy.

I don't think the Hawks will blow it up, and I think there are good reasons for that.

But hey, maybe they'll go full-on firesale and be the Sixers for 4-5 years.  Could happen, I guess.

Oh I don't think they will blow it up, I think they should.  Big difference.  Too much money involved by being a playoff team for the owner to go in that direction.

Let us not forget that Atlanta won 60 games last year and got swept by a team whose 2nd and 3rd best players played a total of 2 games (out of 8 possible i.e. 4 for Irving and 4 for Love) and just 49 minutes total.  Atlanta has some nice players, they don't have championship core level players and their two best players are only going to get worse as time goes on (as a result of age and injuries).

I'm just arguing for a middle ground perspective here.  I think there are goals worth pursuing apart from fielding a top 4 or 5 team with a substantial likelihood of winning a title.

Especially if you're in a market like Atlanta, it's just so hard to reach that point.  It probably only happens if you're lucky enough to get the top pick in a draft with a generational talent.  Otherwise, you're hoping to find the next Steph Curry, Paul George, or Dirk Nowitzki in the second half of the lottery.

I really don't know if you can "plan" to end up with that kind of player, especially if you have a small market team with very little appeal to free agents.

The Hawks have drafted horribly at the top of the lottery though.  Horford was the correct pick, but in the three drafts prior to Horford, they took Sheldon Williams at 5, Marvin Williams at 2, and Josh Childress at 6.  They left significantly better players on the immediate board (i.e. within 3 picks) including the best PG of this generation in Chris Paul.  You can't have 4 straight picks in the top 6 and come away with 1 good player (I mean the other three were basically mediocre players and certainly weren't as good as players taken immediately after them). 

In fact, historically Atlanta is horrible drafting when it gets high picks.  Prior to Childress, the Hawks traded the 3rd pick (Pau Gasol) for basically Abdur-Rahim (that worked out well).  Before Gasol the last time Atlanta had a top 5 pick was 1985, hello Jon Koncak or maybe Al Wood at #4 in 1981.  They aren't as bad going back further, but the point I'm getting at is simply, the Hawks ruined their last span of terribleness by drafting like crap.  Before that, they traded away a future HOFer for basically garbage. 

Now maybe this terrible draft record at top is why you don't tank if you are Atlanta because they have actually done fairly well later in the draft i.e. Teague was 19, Schroder was 17, Jenkins and Scott were 23 and 43 in the same draft, and of course Josh Smith at 17 in the Childress draft. 

[loco_91]

Depends on what their goal is. They can stay competitive in the weak East for a few more years by keeping Horford around, keeping their core intact. I agree that trading Teague could be a good idea - he seems overrated, and they might be able to fleece someone.

But if they want to win a championship, they should blow it up. Their core is aging. They don't have a clear path forward to become legit contenders.

[indeedproceed]

If Horford walks (somewhere besides Boston) I try to steal Paul Millsap with every non-lottery pick I can offer, along with potentially a Sullinger S&T for Splitter.

[jpotter33]

Depends on what their goal is. They can stay competitive in the weak East for a few more years by keeping Horford around, keeping their core intact. I agree that trading Teague could be a good idea - he seems overrated, and they might be able to fleece someone.

But if they want to win a championship, they should blow it up. Their core is aging. They don't have a clear path forward to become legit contenders.

This is an important point. I think those who are arguing that they should blow it up, myself included, are thinking in the second mold, while those who are arguing they should reload are thinking in the first mold.

[greece66]

Depends on what their goal is. They can stay competitive in the weak East for a few more years by keeping Horford around, keeping their core intact. I agree that trading Teague could be a good idea - he seems overrated, and they might be able to fleece someone.

But if they want to win a championship, they should blow it up. Their core is aging. They don't have a clear path forward to become legit contenders.

This is an important point. I think those who are arguing that they should blow it up, myself included, are thinking in the second mold, while those who are arguing they should reload are thinking in the first mold.

Yep, that's why I think they should try something different: ultimately the aim of every team is to win a championship.

Besides, the Hawks have proven themselves, performing well in the RS and playoffs the last few years. But there is no award for sustained good enough performance (you may ask the Suns or Utah) 

[Celtics4ever]

I think Horford has verbalized a desire to go back to ATL.  But all that crap about him wanting to come here seems to have been little more than speculation.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nba/post/_/id/19634/al-horford-wants-to-stay-but-hawks-have-big-some-decisions-to-make

Who knows what the team will do, however.