NBA Front Office Rankings: CBS Sports Places Hawks Front Office Among the Bottom of the League

The Atlanta Hawks front office has faced quite a bit of criticism over the past few years and it is certainly understandable why. The team does not spend into the luxury tax and at times, their plan for building a roster and championship contender has not always made sense to the fanbase. However, they have made some positive moves over the past year that could be signs of good things to come. They got back Dyson Daniels and two first round picks in the Dejounte Murray trade. They drafted Zaccharie Risacher with the No. 1 pick and he has turned into a good player as a rookie and appears to have a bright future. The move to trade De'Andre Hunter was not popular, but getting off of his contract and clearing money for the future could be the better move.

So where exactly should the Hawks front office rank amongst the others in the league? CBS Sports analyst Sam Quinn ranked every front office of the league using the following criteria:

Does their general manager have a successful track record? This is probably the single most important factor we'll measure. The more winning an executive has done, the more latitude they get for recent missteps or a losing record. Keep in mind that the lead basketball decision-maker is the single figure most responsible for these rankings. Even if a team has a successful track record, they're going to lose credit if the general manager currently in place was not at the helm for that success.
Is there a clear plan in place? This is relatively simple. While not every great front office has the same plan for building a championship roster, they all at least have one. Is their vision readily apparent? Have their recent moves taken them closer to that end goal?
Is their team winning? This isn't an absolute, as the first two points covered, but having a good team today certainly helps.
Is their owner willing to spend enough money to win consistently?
Is their owner heavily involved in basketball decisions? If the answer is yes, is there a reason to believe that owner's voice in basketball matters is at all helpful?
Is it readily apparent who is making major basketball decisions? Most successful front offices have a single lead executive who has final say on basketball matters. If a team does not, is there reason to believe that their alternative structure is at all helpful?
Has this front office done a good job hiring head coaches? Does this front office collaborate with its head coaches effectively?
How have circumstances impacted their outcomes? Has a team made good decisions that have been doomed by poor health? Has a team benefitted from or been hurt by its market or history?
Does this front office tend to draft well in terms of where it picks?
Does this front office tend to sign players to contracts that represent good value relative to the market?
Does this front office tend to win its trades?
Is this front office notably creative in how it acquires or retains players?
Is everyone in the organization properly aligned towards the goal of meaningfully competing for a championship, either now or in the future? This thankfully only applies to a small number of teams, but no front office is going to rank well if it appears comfortable winning 45 games in perpetuity.

Quinn ranked the Hawks at No. 26, in the tier of "I have real questions" and had this to say about the front office:

"The Hawks are incredibly difficult to rank because of the complicated power dynamics within their front office. The disastrous acquisition of Dejounte Murray, for instance, came at a time in which Travis Schlenk was nominally the general manager. However, The Athletic's Sam Amick has since reported that Schlenk was wary of the price, but that Nick Ressler, the son of owner Tony Ressler, was a driving force behind the deal. Ressler obviously remains with the organization and seemingly wields power alongside Schlenk's replacement at general manager, Landry Fields. A lot of the front office was shaken up around Schlenk's 2022 departure, with experienced basketball evaluators often replaced by less proven executives that, according to Amick, have close ties to Ressler.

This group's decision-making has improved over time. The return for Murray when they needed to trade him, which included Dyson Daniels and two first-round picks, was strong. Zaccharie Risacher has had a reasonably successful rookie season as a No. 1 overall pick in a bad draft. But the burden of proof here lies with the unorthodox front office, and thus far, they haven't displayed a promising overall vision for the franchise moving forward. Their cost-cutting move to trade De'Andre Hunter for limited value at the deadline was disappointing, and it's not even clear if Trae Young will remain in Atlanta for the long haul either. The Hawks haven't hurt themselves to nearly the same degree some teams on this list have, but they have a long way to go."

This offseason is going to be the next time to judge what the Hawks are doing. Trae Young's extension is going to be the talk of the offseason for the Hawks and everything else could be based on that. For now, the Hawks are still trying to make the playoffs over the last 26 games.

Related Links