ATLANTA — Highly successful billionaires tend to be wound a little differently than the rest of us and have their combustible side. Hawks owner Tony Ressler certainly fits that prototype and it seems appropriate that he named his global investment company, “Ares,” after the mythical Greek god of war.
Advertisement
So when things don’t go well, Ressler responds. Just last week, after a series of negative articles in The Athletic that painted a picture of dysfunction in the organization and reflected poorly on himself, Ressler walked past me before the Hawks’ game against the Wizards and yelled, “Got to get your facts straight! Facts matter! Facts matter!” At which point, I turned around and asked him what reporting had been inaccurate. He kept walking and I figured that would be the end of it.
Then came Friday. Ressler, believing the media has written and perpetuated falsities about him, what led to the effective firing of former president of basketball operations Travis Schlenk, the power of his son and front office member Nick Ressler, and related matters, decided to try to change the narrative. He did a small handful of interviews, the last of which came with me. (I assume he wanted to leave the best for last.) This was unusual in that Ressler generally only speaks before and after seasons. He did not speak in December when Schlenk was officially downgraded to an advisory role — which Ressler now acknowledges was a cover for his exit — or when coach Nate McMillan was fired.
Ressler and I spoke about several topics, including Schlenk’s exit, the elevation of general manager Landry Fields and Kyle Korver, his team’s struggles and whether potential roster changes might include star Trae Young.
We started where we left off.
Why are you doing interviews now?
If anything I owe you an apology. We removed our head of basketball operations and if there’s anything I’ve learned, I should have sat with you and other members of the media and said why, and I didn’t. I thought I didn’t need to. I thought it was a statement of the obvious. I thought I could improve the basketball operations, so I replaced our head with Landry and ultimately Kyle. A great deal of misinformation has occurred as a result, so I thought the best thing I could do, better late than never, is have a conversation and make clear what I think is truthful and isn’t. Others will decide for themselves but at least I’ll have my perspective and the franchise’s perspective and just letting others create that narrative is probably a mistake.
Advertisement
So what is truthful and what has not been truthful?
There’s a long list of that. I’d rather stick to why did I make the change, and that’s because I wanted our front office to run that much more effectively and be much more collaborative and communicative. And Landry and Kyle came to me and they said that we should make a coaching change and they had a plan and they wanted to execute that plan and I agreed with them and embraced that perspective.
I understand why you want to move forward, but when you said what you did last week …
I said truth matters and I stand by that statement.
So you suggest the truth has not been written. So what has been wrong in your view?
It’s like he said/she said.
If you want to set the record straight, set the record straight. Where do you think we got it wrong?
My only job always has been and continues to be to put people in charge who I think are great and delegate to them and let them make important decisions, and I challenge them. Your article suggested differently, and it’s not just you. The articles from your publication suggested differently. I pride myself on running a good business and the way you did that is putting the best people you can in charge and give them as much room to really make important decisions, challenge those decisions, and that’s precisely what I did. If someone suggests otherwise, those are untruths.
Nobody has written you didn’t have the right to do what you want as the owner. People have written about dysfunction.
Give me an example of dysfunction.
Certainly Nick has been referenced a lot.
Untrue. He has never been in a position to make a decision. Never once. Even the thought of it is so embarrassing to me. One, he’s done a great job working here. Two, he’s my son and I love him. Three, the idea that I’m running whatever billions of dollars this asset is worth with others owners and investors that I’d delegate one bit of my authority to Nick or anyone else is disrespectful, untrue, inaccurate. So who made that up?
Advertisement
Nobody to my knowledge has written that Nick made decisions. What has been written is that he’s not just a voice but a significant voice because he is your son and he has made other people uncomfortable because he can’t be viewed as just another voice in the room.
It’s untrue.
What part?
That he made people uncomfortable.
Tony, we’ve talked to those people.
Who? Do they still work here? Look, the idea that you’re using former employees for a narrative that is untrue. The simple answer is we have a front office today that works beautifully, where Nick is one of many voices and frankly an unbelievably positive and supportive voice. And if you ask anyone who works here they would tell you yes.
Let me just state that the uncomfortableness and the talk, not just from within your organization and around the league, was around long before these past several months when you made the front office change.
Bizarre to me. NBA franchises are very interesting and complicated and exciting businesses that are often owned by families. Do I get input from all my three sons and my wife all the time? (Nick’s) input is one of many voices that I get that I value. Whoever would have said that either doesn’t know Nick or for some reason is trying to create a story that doesn’t exist.
So you’re saying all those people are wrong.
Emphatically wrong. Not even a little bit wrong. Nick’s been a positive influence. We have a fairly large basketball ops that values a whole bunch of voices and Nick’s one of them. … What he is is a great kid who works his ass off and is one of the many voices that feed into Kyle and Landry. Am I partial? Maybe. But if I didn’t think he was a positive influence to this franchise, he wouldn’t be here. … It’s very important to me that perception is similar to reality. When you say I give a disproportionate amount of influence to my son, that’s just a f—— lie, because I would be running a lesser business than I’m capable of.
Things change on a dime in sports. You’re the owner and you can do what you want. You were a big fan of Travis’, to the extent that you gave him a big extension after the Eastern Conference finals. A little more than a year later he effectively was out of a job. So what changed?
He did some good things. But could our basketball operations group run better? Could we be more collaborative? Could we be more communicative? I thought we could be. Could we have real communication from the ownership to the front office to the coaching staff to the players? Did that exist? Obviously, I didn’t think so. … Did I work with Travis to try to become more inclusive? It’s a fair assumption I did. Today it exists beautifully. I don’t mean to be defensive and I don’t want to be aggressive, but I thought our front office could run better, and I think we can say that since the Eastern Conference finals we might not have been (ascending).
Nobody would dispute that. But that’s a dramatic change in your opinion about your president of basketball operations in a short time.
When an organization isn’t improving, progress is tough to come by. We were not doing what I consider so important for successful basketball operations. … Look, I want Travis to find his next chapter. I wish him well. I think Travis does some things really well. I’ll leave it at that.
Advertisement
In sports, we see success and failure back to back often. But seldom does the owner change everything right away in the front office. There’s usually more of a progression — in this case from the point of the conference finals. So what changed so dramatically? What was the flashpoint?
I won’t give details. Look, you have a legitimate criticism of me as the owner. Why would you give someone an extension and then a year and a half later think that the organization could run better without him. Over the year and a half, the series of decisions we either did or didn’t make in our front office was evidence to me of a meaningful lack of greatness. At the end of the day, that’s all I can go by. I learned a bunch in that year and a half. If you asked me did the Eastern Conference finals cloud your vision of how you wanted this place to run? That’s a fair criticism. But if you’re asking me did I delegate decision-making to anyone throughout this the answer is (bleeping) no!
Have you played any role in basketball decision-making?
I challenge everyone. I challenge to understand. But no — I never overruled our front office.
So if the front office said yes to somebody, you challenged them and they still said yes, you backed off? And if they said no to somebody, same thing?
Exactly as you described. In no circumstances (did I tell them what to do), including to get under the tax. Never. … An owner who overrules people who know more than him is a bad owner. I try not to do that and I’ve never done that.
As the owner, what is your level of accountability?
If you’re the final decision maker, which I am, you have to have complete accountability. I feel I’m accountable for this business, on and off the court. We went to the Eastern Conference finals, last year we were out in the first round and this year we’re a .500 team. Of course I take responsibility.
Do you believe significant roster changes might be necessary after this season?
We just elevated Landry, elevated Kyle and we brought in a world-class coach (Quin Snyder). I think we have a talented roster and we should be better.
Landry has referenced the need for accountability. Is every player on the table when it comes to potential change, including Trae Young?
Landry and Kyle are trying to create strongly what it means to be a Hawk. What development first really means. What building a culture really means, and make sure we have a roster that can accommodate those priorities. We’re not there yet in terms of decision-making.
You’re just not prepared to say what that looks like right now?
Absolutely not.
Advertisement
To be fair, some will read this and say the owner didn’t close the door to trading Trae Young.
There should be clarity. I don’t open the door or close the door to any personnel. Landry is the GM and Kyle is the assistant GM. They get a lot more input and should be better decision-makers than me.
(Photo: Dale Zanine / USA Today)