Jump to content

 

Photo
- - - - -

Want to Know Why Blank Is So Desired As An Owner?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
26 replies to this topic

#1 AHF

AHF

    General Manager

  • Moderators
  • 20,325 posts
  • Joined 26-January 04

Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:18 AM

Can you imagine him pulling this #$*#?

Reported by Michael Cunningham on June 25, 2010:

They also sold the rights to German center Tibor Pleiss to Oklahoma City for close to $3 million, the maximum amount allowable under salary-cap rules.

While the Hawks could have selected a project center or wing with that pick, Sund suggested the money earned from selling the pick would be used to add proven players to the roster.

“I think we need more veterans,” he said. “We are one of the youngest teams in the league still. I think we need to fill out the rest of the roster with veterans.”


http://blogs.ajc.com...ious-frenchman/

So, we are going to be using the money to upgrade our lineup with a "proven" veteran player? OK

:phone:

Reported by Michael Cunningham on Thursday, July 1, 2010:

The person said general manager Rick Sund and his staff realize that adding Johnson isn't enough to make the team better on its own. They would still want to add more talent, including a starting-caliber center, and Hawks owners are willing to pay the NBA's luxury tax “for the right player,” according to the person.


http://www.ajc.com/s...-to-562671.html

Suddenly, this is becoming clearer we are willing to spend into the tax to upgrade the roster with proven veterans!

:beer11:

Reported by Michael Cunningham on Thursday, July 14, 2010:

As for Aldridge’s contention that the Hawks aren’t willing to pay much more than the minimum due to “budget limitations,” all I can tell you is that everything I’ve heard suggests they are willing to exceed the luxury-tax threshold for the right player(s).


http://blogs.ajc.com...marvin-williams

Shaq or not, here come those proven veteran talent upgrades!

:bye1:

Reported by Michael Cunningham on Thursday, July 14, 2010 (later in the day):

In fact, after post-J.J. indications that the Hawks were willing to push their payroll above the luxury-tax threshold of $70.3 million, it’s becoming increasingly clear ASG wants to avoid paying the tax


http://blogs.ajc.com...mmer-struggles/

Soooo....we are filling the roster with 3 players at or near the veteran minimum, huh?

:help wanted3:

#2 spotatl

spotatl

    Starter

  • Squawkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,255 posts
  • Joined 27-October 09

Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:21 AM

The Hawks could spend around 3.5 million for another player and still not pay the luxury tax.

#3 hawksfanatic

hawksfanatic

    Rumple Minze Connoisseur




  • Amount:
  • Squawk Supporter
  • 7,283 posts
  • Joined 18-April 05

Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:23 AM

Slowly, this board is realizing how awful the ASG really is. Until they actually make moves, I am going to continue to assume that they are morons. So far, my assumptions haven't led me to a wrong conclusion of the ASG yet.

#4 NineOhTheRino

NineOhTheRino

    ICEHOUSE Connoisseur

  • Squawk Supporter
  • 3,485 posts
  • Joined 14-October 08

Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:26 AM

the only difference in AB and ASG is AB is a billionaire and ASG is a collection on millionaires.

AB has made some mistakes too

1 - Paying Peerless Price
2 - Making MV7 the hugest paid player in the NFL

The only reason we're not calling AB an idiot now is he has enough money to fix his screw ups.

Edited by NineOhTheRino, 16 July 2010 - 10:27 AM.


#5 AHF

AHF

    General Manager

  • Moderators
  • 20,325 posts
  • Joined 26-January 04

Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:26 AM

The Hawks could spend around 3.5 million for another player and still not pay the luxury tax.


There are two things going on here. (1) Credibility with the fan base. (2) Meaningfully spending our FA dollars to upgrade the roster. Your point that we could sign two minimum players and get another for around $3.5M goes to the second point.

I think the messages the fans have seen this offseason went from eliciting the reaction of "now signing JJ makes sense - we are going to spend into the tax, add some real depth and take our shot at the top!" to "why in the world did we resign JJ if we didn't mean to spend like contending teams do?"

On the second point, I hear what you are saying about the $3.5M along with two minimum salary vets. My reaction is: "Sweet. We are willing to spend almost enough money to land an impact "proven veteran" like Luke Ridnour! I wonder who will be willing to sign with the Hawks for less than Ridnour got. Someone awesome, I bet!"

Edited by AHF, 16 July 2010 - 10:30 AM.


#6 AHF

AHF

    General Manager

  • Moderators
  • 20,325 posts
  • Joined 26-January 04

Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:29 AM

the only difference in AB and ASG is AB is a billionaire and ASG is a collection on millionaires.


AB also hires his management, empowers them to make decisions and then fires them when he no longer trusts them to keep making those decisions. I don't think you can say that about the ASG. They neutered BK (no trading for Calderon; no power to hire and fire your coach; etc.) and still didn't fire him (he resigned). Now Sund admits Drew wasn't his recommendation for the coaching hire. I don't think you would see anything like that about the Falcons' GM.

#7 spotatl

spotatl

    Starter

  • Squawkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,255 posts
  • Joined 27-October 09

Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:34 AM

I don't see the contradictory statements here. They would prefer to bring in veterans to fill out the roster rather than Rookies. The hawks are willing to pay the luxury tax for the right player which I do believe them on. If a gasol got dropped in their lap they would pay the tax for them. You just ignored the critical part of "FOR THE RIGHT PLAYERS". To me that was pretty clear that htey weren't planning to spend the MLE unless someone absolutely dropped in their lap.

#8 AHF

AHF

    General Manager

  • Moderators
  • 20,325 posts
  • Joined 26-January 04

Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:41 AM

I don't see the contradictory statements here. They would prefer to bring in veterans to fill out the roster rather than Rookies. The hawks are willing to pay the luxury tax for the right player which I do believe them on. If a gasol got dropped in their lap they would pay the tax for them. You just ignored the critical part of "FOR THE RIGHT PLAYERS". To me that was pretty clear that htey weren't planning to spend the MLE unless someone absolutely dropped in their lap.


If you are waiting for Pau Gasol to sign with the MLE....let's just say I wouldn't go public with that part of your plan. I'd keep that safely hidden away from reporters who might otherwise question your sanity.

Like you, I am really, really hoping that the Hawks are burning up the phone lines trying to pull off their own Pau Gasol/Chris Paul/etc. sort of trade. For PR purposes, I think it is a disaster to say that you are willing to pay the tax "for the right player" when there is no realistic or foreseeable opportunity to spend it on that "right player." I can at least wrap my head around the idea that the "right player" qualifier explains an unwillingness to pay the tax.

I do, however, see the whole idea of adding talent around JJ to be completely at odds with the idea of filling out the roster with two minimum salary vets and a $3.5M vet. That will get you a whole lot of nothing unless you just hit a home run in FA ala Flip Murray or Chris Anderson. Signing Joe Smith, Jason Collins and a fill-in-the-blank $3.5M player is NOT going to meaningfully add talent around JJ so don't even mention the plan to upgrade the talent on the roster outside of the draft (where you got Crawford and then sold the #31 pick) if you are relying on two minimum salary vets and a $3.5M sub-Luke-Ridnour-profile player.

That echoes the promises during the BK era where we were going to go out and get a veteran big man and then signed Lorenzen Wright. Those types of promises and follow-through just undermine your credibility with the fan base.

#9 spotatl

spotatl

    Starter

  • Squawkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,255 posts
  • Joined 27-October 09

Posted 16 July 2010 - 11:04 AM

I would have had zero issue with the Hawks having an offseason filling out the roster with Brad Miller, Jason Williams, and Brian Zoubek or Mikael Torrance.

I don't think I'd be willing to pay $11M to bring Shaq in this season and once you factor in the luxury tax thats what he would cost the ASG. I think that a willingness to pay the tax if the right deal were to come along is all that I can ask for. I don't think that shaq is a difference maker for this team, I just would hate to see the team turn down a firesale kind off trade because they were 100% against paying the tax.

Edited by spotatl, 16 July 2010 - 11:07 AM.


#10 hawksfanatic

hawksfanatic

    Rumple Minze Connoisseur




  • Amount:
  • Squawk Supporter
  • 7,283 posts
  • Joined 18-April 05

Posted 16 July 2010 - 11:21 AM

I don't think I'd be willing to pay $11M to bring Shaq in this season and once you factor in the luxury tax thats what he would cost the ASG. I think that a willingness to pay the tax if the right deal were to come along is all that I can ask for. I don't think that shaq is a difference maker for this team, I just would hate to see the team turn down a firesale kind off trade because they were 100% against paying the tax.


Are you saying Shaq costs us $11 million with the MLE? Or are you implying we make the S&T and get Shaq starting at ~$7 million?

#11 AHF

AHF

    General Manager

  • Moderators
  • 20,325 posts
  • Joined 26-January 04

Posted 16 July 2010 - 11:23 AM

Are you saying Shaq costs us $11 million with the MLE? Or are you implying we make the S&T and get Shaq starting at ~$7 million?


I think he is factoring in the loss of revenue sharing and the luxury tax hit from signing Shaq to a MLE without a S&T.

#12 hawksfanatic

hawksfanatic

    Rumple Minze Connoisseur




  • Amount:
  • Squawk Supporter
  • 7,283 posts
  • Joined 18-April 05

Posted 16 July 2010 - 11:25 AM

I think he is factoring in the loss of revenue sharing and the luxury tax hit from signing Shaq to a MLE without a S&T.


OK, I forgot about the rebate check when calculating.

#13 spotatl

spotatl

    Starter

  • Squawkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,255 posts
  • Joined 27-October 09

Posted 16 July 2010 - 11:26 AM

Are you saying Shaq costs us $11 million with the MLE?


I'm saying that with a MLE salary of 5.8 million salary it puts the Hawks over the luxury tax where they would be paying a 2M luxury tax payment plus missing out on their share of the escro payment which was 3.7M last season. So 11M is what Shaq would actually cost the Hawks if they spent the MLE on him and I can understand why they don't think he is worth it.

Edited by spotatl, 16 July 2010 - 11:27 AM.


#14 drzachary

drzachary

    Resident Foodie

  • Squawkers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,962 posts
  • Joined 09-July 02

Posted 16 July 2010 - 11:36 AM

I don't think I'd be willing to pay $11M to bring Shaq in this season and once you factor in the luxury tax thats what he would cost the ASG.


Who CARES how much it costs the ASG? I don't care at ALL how much ASG spends, or where the money comes from, how much debt they are allegedly in (they'll make tens, if not hundreds, of millions when they sell years down the road.) I want to see players in Hawks unis, and I want to see playoff wins. I want to see a contender.

#15 swanlee

swanlee

    Summer League

  • Squawkers
  • PipPipPip
  • 73 posts
  • Joined 17-November 09

Posted 16 July 2010 - 11:42 AM

the only difference in AB and ASG is AB is a billionaire and ASG is a collection on millionaires.

AB has made some mistakes too

1 - Paying Peerless Price
2 - Making MV7 the hugest paid player in the NFL

The only reason we're not calling AB an idiot now is he has enough money to fix his screw ups.



At least AB puts his money where his mouth is. Everyone is going to make mistakes he is willing to accept them and spend money to fix it. I think that is a good thing.