Trae needs a system and complementary players similar to what Curry has with the Warriors. The Hawks still haven't given him a great coach or put the pieces around him.
Unless Trae is an innovative NBA head coach who can inspire and develop players, I don't want to trade for him.
Seems clear the NBA is moving away from heliocentric offenses that revolve around 1 player with super high usage rate (Harden/Rockets, Luka/Mavs). I thought that was the whole point in bringing Murray to ATL, but it doesn't seem to make a difference. Trae needs to dominate the ball. I'm not certain Green, Smith, or Seguin is gonna lead us to the promised land, but I'm pretty certain Trae isn't.
You could argue the Bucks have a heliocentric offense. Same for GSW, their entire offense revolves around Curry. Luka has zero help and we almost could have won a championship with a Harden-centric offense (except we just HAD to break a record for missed 3s). It’s more putting the right pieces around those players.
No thanks. I’d much rather wait for Harden to come back as a free agent and run the point for the young kids than trade half the team for Young. AND I IN NO WAY want Harden back. Let the kids grow. They’re so young and despite a horrible game last night they’ve made progress and are in a better place this year than last. And theyre in a position to mature together AND add more young talent in the draft. Patience
Having an offense built around a player is not the same as having an offense run by one player dominating the ball.
The Bucks were not far from this when they get to the playoffs. Middleton and Holiday took (and converted) just enough turns to get them through the end in 21, but it's usually a lot of one guy stuff in the POs for them
trae's size and poor D always turn out costly against his team. theoretically murry who is an elite defender will complement him well and it's still early in the season so i guess the hawks will wait until next summer to make any major transactions.
I'd rather see what the talent we have develops into than trade for Trae Young. If what we have doesn't work out then that's still a better option than trading for Young.
Is it really? If the Rockets have jack **** now (this is possible!) and the whole last 3 drafts haven't produced a single Trae Young caliber player, is it really preferable to be terrible for 3-5 more years rather than "settle"for a Trae Young. That's a lost decade basically. At the end of the day, i started watching basketball bc i liked watching it, not bc i want to subject myself to a decade of process oriented outcome maximizing. I also think in a Bayesian sense, to say that you know Traes ceiling while hypothetical next guy's ceiling is higher - seems questionable to me. What's not questionable is that anyone on the current squad is close to Trae Young on offense - they are just tiers below
You quoted me so I'm assuming you are referring to me. Where did I say that I "KNOW" Young's ceiling? Hint: I didn't. But, I think we are closer to knowing what Young is a player than any of our young guys.
