Our Truth About Trae Young: Was He Really the Hawks’ Problem?

The trade that sent Trae Young to the Washington Wizards in exchange for CJ McCollum and Corey Kispert wasn’t just one of the most debated moves of the 2025-26 NBA season: it was, above all, a statement of intent.

After nearly eight seasons, Atlanta closed the chapter on the face of the franchise, moving on from a four-time All-Star in order to refresh its identity, pace and team structure.

The lingering question, however, remains the same — simple in form, complex in substance: was Trae Young really the Hawks’ problem?

The Numbers With Trae Young: Talent and Instability

Sticking strictly to the facts, Young’s final season in Atlanta was fragmented and inconsistent. In the 2025-26 season he played just 10 games, finishing with a 2-8 record – a 20% win rate – compared to a positive 24-22 record – above .500 – without him. His individual numbers – 19.3 points and 8.9 assists – were solid, but below his career averages (25.2 points and 9.8 assists).

It wasn’t just the limited wins that stood out. The data shows that with Young on the floor, the Hawks’ offense produced at similar levels compared to games without him, posting a 116.0 Offensive Rating with Trae and 114.6 without him.

The defense, however, collapsed, registering one of the worst Defensive Ratings in the league (122.1), compared to a clear improvement in the 46 games without him (114.8).

The offense became more static, heavily dependent on his time of possession and isolation plays.

Not an Anomaly Limited to This Season

From the 2023-24 season onward, the Hawks have posted a lower winning percentage with Young on the floor (42.9%) compared to games without him (52.5%), with the offense becoming more static and heavily reliant on his ball dominance and isolation scoring.

Without Trae, Atlanta found better balance, showing a different version of itself during his injury absences:

• 13-9 record before his return;
• Top-10 in the NBA in points scored;
• 13th-ranked defense;
• First in total assists and assist ratio.

These numbers describe a more fluid offense, less dependent on individual brilliance and more built on ball movement and shared responsibility. Shooting percentages didn’t collapse either, suggesting that a collective-based system could compensate for the absence of a pure point guard.

Upon Young’s return, however, the trend reversed: the defense regressed and the balance built in previous weeks gradually disappeared.

A New Identity

The decision to move on from Trae wasn’t a teardown, but a redistribution of responsibilities. CJ McCollum is more of an off-ball scorer, less ball-dominant and more compatible with a collective structure. Corey Kispert helps improve spacing. Most importantly, the franchise chose to place greater responsibility on Jalen Johnson and Dyson Daniels within the team’s framework.

The results have not been linear – as expected during a transition phase – and the answer isn’t binary. Yes, Trae Young was part of the problem, within the specific context of an Atlanta roster still incomplete, unable to sustain him on both ends of the floor and grow alongside him.

No, the trade was not a rejection of Young’s talent – he remains an All-Star – but rather an acknowledgment that the project as constructed, built on excessive ball concentration in the hands of a single player, wasn’t working.

What’s in the Hawks’ Future?

Today’s Hawks are indeed a team in transition – as mentioned – but with a clearer direction. For a franchise aiming to stop hovering between the Play-In and unfulfilled potential, rebuilding from identity – even before talent – is a choice that deserves close attention, with a future still entirely to be written.