JayBirdHawk, on 28 January 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:
Hornets are asking for too much for Kaman...expiring contracts, a young player and draft picks.
I'll have some of what they're drinking.
~lw3
0
Hornets To Pursue Trade Of Chris Kaman....Are the Hawks interested?
Started by
JTB
, Jan 28 2012 05:55 AM
16 replies to this topic
#16
-
- Squawk Supporter
-
- Join Date: 24-October 08
- Post Count: 3,420
Apologist-in-Chief
- Gender:Male
- Location: WestCyde - HowHell Mill
Posted 29 January 2012 - 10:35 AM
I'll have some of what they're drinking.
~lw3
#17
-
- Squawk Supporter
-
- Join Date: 08-June 02
- Post Count: 2,457
Hawksquawk Founder
- Gender:Male
- Location: Beaumont, TX
- Fan since:1971
Posted 29 January 2012 - 03:35 PM
First, I'll be surprised if the Hawks go after Kaman simply because this franchise's philosophy has been very resistant to letting go of players with seniority, and since he cannot be obtained with only Hinrich, it would require sending out a long-term player (e.g., ZaZa or Marvin) for a rental that is highly unlikely to be a rent-to-own situation (i.e., re-signing).
Having said that, I also think that if the Hawks do make a move for Kaman after all, it's going to require a third team in the mix.
But the major thing I want to address is some of these things that Stein wrote...
Two things.
One: If Sund has clearance to go after K-Mart, whose addition almost certainly is going to require, at minimum, the $2.5 mil exception, then you have to weigh for yourself whether it's likely that they would consider Kaman a player who would make a greater impact... since, they're on-record as saying they would go over the cap for the right player.
Two: The assertion assumes that acquiring Kaman means adding payroll. Bad assumption. A trade could just as easily represent a savings.
Clearly, ownership has to decide if by not making a move they're in a better position fiscally than they would be if they did make one... and as I demonstrate here, that's a function of the specifics of a given trade on the table.)
Important only if Kaman's contract committed the Hawks to more than just this season. It does not. So, assuming he's healthy at this moment in time, it's not important.
While I'm not really a fan of trading 1st round picks, the point here is, exactly what "should" a late-to-very-late 1st round pick bring to Stein's way of thinking? Honestly, that line as much as anything else he's written here makes me wonder how Stein is deemed by ESPN worthy of being one of their primary columnists.
Really? Not a whole lot of evidence of that, even with Horford out, so are we left to trust that Stein has an insider view of the Hawks braintrust?
A difference in some stats, but not any discernable difference yet in the win-loss column. And, two seasons before Josh is a FA, means we've got one season before the braintrust will be most strongly considering cashing him in for other talent.
So, not just yes, but hell yes. If not now, when? We've been building toward this epiphany for the better part of 10 years now. And what... we're supposed to be so scared of the Bulls and... now... the Sixers that we're going to hold back?
Again, I need some evidence that Stein actually is so well-connected with the Hawks decision-makers that he can lecture us ATL fans about misreading whatever. I can safely say that he misreads many of us if he thinks we're impressed with this assertion that he knows better just because he's Marc Stein of ESPN.
Having said that, I also think that if the Hawks do make a move for Kaman after all, it's going to require a third team in the mix.
But the major thing I want to address is some of these things that Stein wrote...
JayBirdHawk, on 28 January 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:
Marc Stein: 7 reasons why Hawks won't trade for Kaman....
1) Chris Kaman makes $14 million this season and the Hawks are still over the luxury tax line.
1) Chris Kaman makes $14 million this season and the Hawks are still over the luxury tax line.
Two things.
One: If Sund has clearance to go after K-Mart, whose addition almost certainly is going to require, at minimum, the $2.5 mil exception, then you have to weigh for yourself whether it's likely that they would consider Kaman a player who would make a greater impact... since, they're on-record as saying they would go over the cap for the right player.
Two: The assertion assumes that acquiring Kaman means adding payroll. Bad assumption. A trade could just as easily represent a savings.
JayBirdHawk, on 28 January 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:
Marc Stein: 7 reasons why Hawks won't trade for Kaman....
2) Related: The Hawks lost $15 million last season. That's without paying the luxury tax, receiving their share of the luxury tax paid by other teams, and playing six home playoff games. Also related: There's no one with money who wants to buy the team
2) Related: The Hawks lost $15 million last season. That's without paying the luxury tax, receiving their share of the luxury tax paid by other teams, and playing six home playoff games. Also related: There's no one with money who wants to buy the team
Clearly, ownership has to decide if by not making a move they're in a better position fiscally than they would be if they did make one... and as I demonstrate here, that's a function of the specifics of a given trade on the table.)
JayBirdHawk, on 28 January 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:
Marc Stein: 7 reasons why Hawks won't trade for Kaman....
3) Chris Kaman has been good and healthy exactly once in the last four seasons.
3) Chris Kaman has been good and healthy exactly once in the last four seasons.
Important only if Kaman's contract committed the Hawks to more than just this season. It does not. So, assuming he's healthy at this moment in time, it's not important.
JayBirdHawk, on 28 January 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:
Marc Stein: 7 reasons why Hawks won't trade for Kaman....
4) Chris Kaman's an okay player. So is Zaza Pachulia. So is Kirk Hinrich can play. So is Marvin Williams. So might be next year's first round draft pick. The Hawks would have to give up some combination of the four to acquire Kaman. Plus, if the Hawks choose to trade another first-round pick, it should be traded for someone better than Chris Kaman if this team's going to improve significantly.
4) Chris Kaman's an okay player. So is Zaza Pachulia. So is Kirk Hinrich can play. So is Marvin Williams. So might be next year's first round draft pick. The Hawks would have to give up some combination of the four to acquire Kaman. Plus, if the Hawks choose to trade another first-round pick, it should be traded for someone better than Chris Kaman if this team's going to improve significantly.
While I'm not really a fan of trading 1st round picks, the point here is, exactly what "should" a late-to-very-late 1st round pick bring to Stein's way of thinking? Honestly, that line as much as anything else he's written here makes me wonder how Stein is deemed by ESPN worthy of being one of their primary columnists.
JayBirdHawk, on 28 January 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:
Marc Stein: 7 reasons why Hawks won't trade for Kaman....
5) The Atlanta Hawks think that Jason Collins can play in a general, rather than highly specialized, sense.
5) The Atlanta Hawks think that Jason Collins can play in a general, rather than highly specialized, sense.
Really? Not a whole lot of evidence of that, even with Horford out, so are we left to trust that Stein has an insider view of the Hawks braintrust?
JayBirdHawk, on 28 January 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:
Marc Stein: 7 reasons why Hawks won't trade for Kaman....
6) Though the Hawks are having a very good season, so are the Bulls and the Heat and the 76ers. The Hawks' playoff chances are a function of both their quality and the quality of the rest of the conference. The Eastern Conference is seriously top-heavy. The Hawks are without Al Horford, they don't know if he'll be back for the playoffs, and being without him has made a difference:
2011-12 Off Eff Def Eff Diff w/ Horford 109.2 100.6 +8.6 w/o Horford 104.2 100.4 +3.8
Is this really the season the Hawks should completely throw financial caution to the wind?
6) Though the Hawks are having a very good season, so are the Bulls and the Heat and the 76ers. The Hawks' playoff chances are a function of both their quality and the quality of the rest of the conference. The Eastern Conference is seriously top-heavy. The Hawks are without Al Horford, they don't know if he'll be back for the playoffs, and being without him has made a difference:
2011-12 Off Eff Def Eff Diff w/ Horford 109.2 100.6 +8.6 w/o Horford 104.2 100.4 +3.8
Is this really the season the Hawks should completely throw financial caution to the wind?
A difference in some stats, but not any discernable difference yet in the win-loss column. And, two seasons before Josh is a FA, means we've got one season before the braintrust will be most strongly considering cashing him in for other talent.
So, not just yes, but hell yes. If not now, when? We've been building toward this epiphany for the better part of 10 years now. And what... we're supposed to be so scared of the Bulls and... now... the Sixers that we're going to hold back?
JayBirdHawk, on 28 January 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:
Marc Stein: 7 reasons why Hawks won't trade for Kaman....
7) The Hawks already made their big move. They locked up Joe Johnson in full knowledge that doing so would severely limit their flexibility. Expecting a subsequent blockbuster trade or free agent signing seriously misreads the powers that be.
7) The Hawks already made their big move. They locked up Joe Johnson in full knowledge that doing so would severely limit their flexibility. Expecting a subsequent blockbuster trade or free agent signing seriously misreads the powers that be.
Again, I need some evidence that Stein actually is so well-connected with the Hawks decision-makers that he can lecture us ATL fans about misreading whatever. I can safely say that he misreads many of us if he thinks we're impressed with this assertion that he knows better just because he's Marc Stein of ESPN.
Reply to this topic
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
