Context:

The Atlanta Hawks are hesitant to sign Trae Young to a four-year extension worth up to $228.6 million, despite his performance as a prolific scorer and playmaker. Unlike the San Antonio Spurs, who quickly secured De'Aaron Fox with a similar deal, the Hawks are constrained by existing long-term financial commitments and potential luxury-tax concerns. Additional financial obligations include players like Kristaps Porziņģis and Dyson Daniels, both of whom are entering contract years. With several key players, the Hawks must assess their current roster and financial flexibility before making a substantial commitment to Young. Young's defensive shortcomings also play a role in the decision as the team evaluates its future strategy and roster composition in a competitive Eastern Conference.

Dive Deeper:

• Trae Young is eligible for a lucrative four-year extension, but the Hawks are not engaging in talks this summer, unlike the Spurs who quickly extended De'Aaron Fox under similar circumstances.

• Financial commitments to players like Jalen Johnson, Nickeil Alexander-Walker, and Onyeka Okongwu through 2027-28 limit the Hawks' ability to offer Young a max contract without tax implications.

• Kristaps Porziņģis and Dyson Daniels are entering contract years, creating additional financial considerations for the Hawks, who must decide whether to extend them or risk losing them as free agents.

• Despite Young's offensive prowess, including leading the league with 11.6 assists per game, his defensive weaknesses and high turnover rate are concerns for the Hawks, especially in playoff scenarios.

• The Hawks are evaluating their new roster, which includes offseason acquisitions like Porziņģis and rookies, to determine if the current core, led by Young, is worth a long-term investment.

• The Eastern Conference landscape and the Hawks' ability to capitalize on it are uncertain, especially as competitors like the Celtics and Pacers deal with key player injuries.

• The Hawks' decision on Young's extension is influenced by a need to balance offensive strength with defensive liabilities, ensuring a competitive and financially sustainable team.