thecampster

What legitimate news source says he's demanded anything. He was asked by a reporter if he thinks he's a max player. He said yes. That is very different than demanding a contract ala Lebron.

Stats would agree with the Josh lovers. in the last 4.5 years, the Hawks are 213-150 in the regular season for a 58.68 winning percentage. They are 11-12 (including 3-0 this year) for a 47.8% winning percentage (39 win borderline playoff team) and 59.4% with him (a 49 win team). The sample is big enough to be significant. If anything, the 3-0 this year throws off the previous sample of being a 42% team without Smith or 34-35 win a year team.

Honestly, I didn't want any of our guys participating. We have a lot of nics and scraps and I'd prefer we get healthy. There is a brutal stretch coming on the schedule and we're going to need every live body to get through it.

And the real sell for Josh is the idea that if he gives them the hometown discount they can really get better talent. Dwight, resign of Kyle etc all become possible but it all begins and ends with Josh. If we trade him for some magic beans, then all of our cap friendly deals are now for naught.

Makes perfect sense, the concept and difference is still very similar. And I know that about next year's cap figure based on salary but often times we complicate things a bit much as it is. The real issue is people throw things out like (20 million per) and its not entirely accurate depending on what you are looking at. Another team's best offer never quite hits 20 mil in any season where the Hawks offer could average that but only if they completely maxed which is silly. Josh is a very good player and should get paid but anything close to the Hawks version of the max is silly. When you aren't dealing max numbers each year could be about anything year to year. a gradual 14-18 million graduated with a 1 mil raise per year would put him 16 per but extremely cap friendly the next 2 seasons given our roster.

9 year player max is not 20 million. First year is (salary cap (58.044) * .30 (30% its 35% for a 10 year player)) = 17.41 million

I focused on him saying how blessed he was to play for the same organization for 9 years. Then about having a family and being rooted. I believe he values those things. IE....to go elsewhere he'd want the whole package because of what he has in Atlanta. Atlanta can sign him in the offseason for 15-16 per for 5 years...count on it. As rules stand now he will be a 9 year player when he signs his new deal. Players in years 7-9 (someone get Hawksfanatic to check my math) can be paid 16.35 million the first year with 7.5% pay raises annually for the next 4 years if a team holds his bird rights or 16.35 million with 4.5% raises annually for 3 years if they don't. So the max math on Josh should be (in millions). Hawks: 17.4 18.71 20.11 21.62 23.24 total 101.08 (avg 20.22 mil per season) The math is different than what you might have heard in the news because for a 10 year vet the max is 35% of the salary cap while for a 7-9 year vet it is 30% of the salary cap. Other team: 17.4 18.18 19.00 19.86 Total 74.44 (average for 4 seasons 18.61). Again the math is different. 7-9 year players can be paid 30% with 4.5% annual raises to other team's free agents. So the difference in Salary between Josh (max Hawks) and Josh (max other team) is a contract value of 26.64 million. We now have 2 things to figure out. If Josh sign with another team, how much would he get paid four years from now when either his skill set has improved or his athleticism has declined. 4 years is a long time and injuries in the NBA happen. One good injury and Josh will not see 1 dime of that 26.64 million. Additionally, even if healthy, if Josh signs with another team his 2017-2018 contract will be determined by that team based on his value at the time. Or as a lifetime Hawk Josh's 2018-2019 value would be set by Atlanta. Not only does remaining a Hawk increase his short term value but it also increases his final contract value. The only thing being moved to another team via trade or FA that enhances Josh's value better is if he's moved to a market where his advertising value increases (ie NY, LA, Chicago). So consider this salary if he stays in Atlanta compared to signing elsewhere. Year1 - 15 Year2 - 16.18 Year3 - 17.33 Year4 - 18.63 Year5 - 20.03 Total - 87.17 (17.343 annuall) Although this is 1.5 million less annually than a max contract with a bidding team, it is still 13 million dollars more total. Given Smith will have no idea what he would command in 2017, it is a very fair contract. Honestly 16 million flat per is still more guaranteed money than if he went to say - Charlotte. Now consider the benefits for Josh in taking slightly less money. The Hawks have less than 22 million committed in Salary next year. The cap number for signing players is based off of 2013 salaries. So if Josh took the aforementioned deal, Dwight could be signed for the max (17.4) year one with a total cap impact of 32.4 million (or a total cap number of 52 million based on hard data). The Hawks could have Teague/Smith/Horford/Howard/Jenkins/Williams/Johnson all under contract and still technically be under the cap with 2 1st round draft pics incoming. However, Josh pushing for the max with another team may not put him in a winning situation and therefore severely hurt his marketing positioning. Just like last season when everyone was screaming he wanted a trade and then he came out publicly saying he wanted to be a Hawk, this is people getting riled up on internet rumors. Ferry knows all of this. Josh and his agent do as well. All I've heard from the media is regurgitated or impossible information. I believe Josh will be here in a week and he'll sign in the offseason for a contract similar to what I just posted. It just makes financial sense.

Now this is interesting....from Ric Bucher So perhaps the trade talk is Atlanta having discussions but so that Smith can see his market value. Never heard that take before but it is an interesting one.

Actually that is really helpful and less impactful than we all thought.

You know in all of our conversations we rarely mention this but it is true. I spoke about it in another thread a few days ago that it was technically a percentage and I wasn't sure if it was yearly/season or games based. I'm fairly sure its based on games and not season dates. So in all of our talk of being able to take back about 5 million more in salary without going over the LT, that may not be true when discussing total contract value. We've played 50 of 82 games so we currently have 39% of our games remaining. The math would be to divide 5 million by .39 which = a little over 12 million. But NBA rules say the total salaries have to be 150%. So if you are only trading Smith, 50% of 13.2 million is 6.6 million. Technically you could take back an 19.8 million in salary (Josh's salary +50%) but for salary spent (ie cap/LT provisions) that salary would only count as 13.2 + (.39*6.6) or 2.58 million. I really don't know, I'm just adding to confusion for the sake of wondering if anyone else knows how the salary total is figured against the trade rules in a midseason trade.

Uhm...I'd do cartwheels for that trade but no way Sactown does that without a pick or 2.

Last 11 games 19.45 pts 9.55 rpb, 5.1 apg 1.64 bpg 51.7% FG% 43.3 3pt% The annual all-star snub motivation is in full swing. Other interesting stat Horford (not 10 games, 1 dnp) 17.8 ppg 10.1 rpg 2.9 apg on 58% shooting Teague (last 13 games as he's been tearing it up for a while) 18.9 ppg 8.3 apg 2.4 rpg 52% shooting What does all this mean? It means the rest of the team hasn't been holding up their end of the bargain. all 3 have been playing at all star levels for a while and the team has lost 4 of their last 10.

Okay, here's the smoking gun for me. Here's that all important extra roster spot I keep talking about in order to make a trade of Al or Josh possible. We are approximately 5 million under the LT. Start looking at players who either A make 17-18.2 million or B. have a problem contract but nice low priced pieces to add. There is no reason not to re-sign Pargo with only 2 points on the roster now (one injury prone and Josh doesn't count) unless something is up.

Because I figured someone else might say it better, I'm using my fabulous copy and paste skills, --------A "cap hold" is the calculated salary slot that a team must reserve for a free agent if they want to retain that free agent's "Bird rights". That is, if they want to be able to exceed the cap to resign the free agent. In order for a team to not be charged a cap hold, they must renounce that free agent, which means they cannot resign them. Oftentimes, the cap hold is bigger than the actual salary that the player is likely to get. If a free agent is quickly resigned, then the player's new salary becomes the cap figure and the cap hold is no longer calculated.-------- There are some basic things here to understand. The memos are not uniform, they are sequential. So the processing must be....waive, renounce, trade. In order to maintain 13-15 on the roster size and to not violate the LT. My statement is not, "can't be done" my statement is: tricky to get done. It has to be enough players to not push us over the LT when complete, but not so few as to push the other team over the LT. This limits the choices. So in essence unless the salaries match up perfectly or have the Hawks taking back more salary but less than 5 million more, teams like the Lakers are out. Consider Josh straight up for Gasol. The difference in Salary, although it fits the 150% rule, would push us into the LT. Since the Lakers are already in the LT, this can't be done (as I understand it). So although Atlanta could send LA a player to make us the excess Salary...LA is at 15 spots as well. Atlanta could just do it after Pargo's contract expires but since its a daily contract the effect is minimal. The Hawks could say release Petro but the cap number does reflect his whole salary being abandoned but only the difference (I believe in games) of his played minus 82. Although it could be dates as well. I haven't looked. Consider Josh and players waived or traded to a team under the LT or even under the cap. Now you have the weird situation of a team that has low talent trying to send back enough for Josh + our scrubs. Again, the options are limited. More importantly those incoming players take cap room for next year so they aren't the same as just a trade. Josh is an expiring and that gives us tremendous offseason flexibility. We aren't going to just dump him for scrubs. The question isn't can't, the question is should we....its vey complicated given next year's scenario.

You can cut Pargo but not Tolliver/Petro. Not because you can't cut them but because until they sign elsewhere, you have a cap hold from those players. If unsigned next year, they exist in your cap figures. Not a problem if you renounce them but it isn't a simple "okay bye" situation. Also, they would have to be cut before the deal is finalized and it can't be conditional. So what happens if you cut Tolliver and then the trade isn't approved. It's a little more complicated than, just waive him.

No, his trade value is pretty fair right now. I'll way in on the above question with a "what it takes. This goes back to my earlier posts on the subject. In order for the Hawks to trade Smith, it will have to be a multi-player deal which includes our lower tier players. Very much like the JJ trade, we would take back multiple 4-7 million dollar salaries to equal Smoove's 13.2 million + kicker. The reason for this is we are currently at 15 roster slots. We can't take back more than 1 player for Smith without first cutting someone or including them in the deal. This is the most likely scenario. The reason for this is there is no player out there at 13 million that gives you what Smith gives you and their team wants to part with him. But there are teams with 3 x 5 million dollar players who would see Smith as fixing what ails them. So to make the rosters match up we would include 2 of Scott, Ivan, Petro, Jenkins, Stevenson. Almost every team would want Jenkins and Scott is a given since his salary is the lowest. No one would want Stevenson except his contract is non guaranteed next year. There would be resistance from the Hawks to do this kind of deal though because most of the salary they would take back would most likely be guaranteed next year and that would affect their cap situation. An example of a team that could pull this off is Charlotte. With a combination of either Ben Gordon or Tyrus Thomas plus Matt Carroll and Gerald Henderson. They could trade for Smoove. Assuming Josh would then resign with them for the max, they would probably include a draft pick. But would the Hawks take a deal with Tyrus Thomas as the center piece? I wouldn't even though I like him as a player he's not worth the 8 million they pay him, not close. Gordon is past his prime and is owed 13 million next season crushing our cap flexibility. They are just one of the teams in a position to pull it off but it is highly unlikely Smith would sign, nixing that deal. Dallas would love him. But Dallas has always been talent greedy. Denver would love him as well, Smith has always played well in their and they've coveted him. Boston loves him but is one of the teams that notoriously wants everything for next to nothing. Does he have value, yes but trading him is tricky for many reasons. The greatest of which is "will he sign with wherever he goes". If he would agree, I think he'd be a King before they could print a jersey for him. Same goes for Portland, Dallas, Charlotte and New Orleans. But would he sign is the issue.

Another thread today found here http://hawksquawk.net/community/topic/376833-the-beat-writer-finally-speaks-lol/ Vivlamore verifies there is no truth to the rumors Hawks are shopping Smith or that he asked for the max.

Wow this board is gullible. This is regurgitated info. The key phrase is, "according to a source". Not even, "a source close to Smith" or "a rival GM". Just, a source. I'm a source, you're a source but most commonly a source is quoting the opinion of another writer of another article.

There are 2 people in my team of 7 that are notorious for it. 1 who is an occasional gossip in comparison. 1 of them it is malicious as he can't stand anyone else who gets praise. If someone writes an email to the team thanking you or a higher up notices you, expect this guy to tell anyone who will listen your every flaw, every shortcut. The other guy its just a part of his personality to do so. I don't think he even realizes it. he just perceives himself as slick and uses it to promote his own image. He knows people no longer trust him but he can't stop. What I'm discussing though is common everywhere. I've never worked anywhere where there wasn't one or two.

He was a good on ball defender against wings but then again he was making 40% of what JJ made. Hence why he got less grief.

I explained in another thread why moving Josh doesn't make sense Gortat. But in the case of Josh for Salmons/Cousins it does. Cousins replaces the game changing quality Smith has while helping us get bigger. He is one of the few I would want to pair next to Al. I'm a firm believer that what a kid says at 22 is not what he says at 25 and I'm willing to forgive his attitude to this point. But Cousins gives you the inside, 2 way presence that a player like Gortat doesn't and he has more upside as well. Salmons is a better player than he's been in Sactown but not as good as he was against us in Milwaukee. He is serviceable and his contract can be ridden out till its tradeable. I'd be down with this deal.

but it doesn't Dolf and here's why. In order to make that trade work, we would have to waive, trade away 2 players. Now in the off season in a sign and trade...yes but with our current roster it isn't even doable without dropping 2 players (and Pargo).

Take a look at these proposed trades at ESPN and tell before you read below, see if you know why only 2 are even an informed opinion. Source: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-130204/nba-best-deals-top-trade-targets These are supposedly ESPN experts. But all but 2 of these ideas involves 3 players or more for just Smith. In each of these scenarios the Hawks would exceed the 15 player roster maximum and would be vetoed by the league office. This is why you don't listen to trade stupidity at the deadline unless the source is local. Like the beat writer.

1. It doesn't matter what it says to the league. It matters what it says to the players we are trying to sign with all our cap space the next few years. I give an ant's antenna what the assistant GM of Sacramento thinks. 2. Those draft picks are trade fodder for sign and trade type of scenarios or filler players. Notice they are not lottery picks. 3. Yes, draft picks are a crap shoot. From injuries to systems to Royce White (do I need say more). It isn't stupid. Marvin would have been good value at 15. Not at 2. It was a bad value pick, nothing more. You are too emotional about this. It's just business. 4. Yes Josh is unrestricted but only teams under the cap are not the only one's he can play for. We can move him to a mid-tier/contending team in a sign and trade in the off season. A move preferable to Josh than to go to a rebuilding situation (teams with cap space). You've heard him. He just wants to win. That means selling out to go to L.A. Boston. Chicago, etc.

Mule, I attempted to address this Josh Smith trade lunacy in another post without calling it lunacy but your post helps to put it in another light. Fans here lost their mind when talking about it, rumor mongering, believing right off the bat it was a true rumor (again). But in my other post, I displayed a GM point of view on trading Smith. Trading Josh isn't just a 1 and done move but a move that will have impact for years to come. Here are just a few ways. 1. Trading away a player of Smith's caliber sends a message to every other player in the league about team loyalty. You have to be very clear in your motivation for trading Smith. The 1 game suspension of Smith (IMO) was a P.R. nightmare inside NBA player circles. Although many fans loved it and commentators applauded without knowing why or how it happened. Other NBA players started gossiping amongst themselves what happened. You can bet Josh told Dwight, Lou got an earful and the rumor mill moved from there. Drew's reputation took a hit...a big hit and right before we're trying to sign elite talent this summer. 2. The rumored players say a great deal about Atlanta. Although Gortat is a shot blocker and rebounds at a better than average rate, he is not respected around the league as a long term solution. For players in win now mode, trading Josh for Gortat (+) is a sign you are not serious about winning now. 3. Trading for picks is worse than above. It signals the 5 years plan and for players in their prime, that is too long. 4. Trading Josh away for players on a contract already changes your options in the off season. For example, teams wanting to sign and trade for Josh in the off-season would be willing to move a better player on the last year of his contract in an attempt to land Smith and afford him. His potential suitors grows when you include sign and trade candidates and Atlanta's returns grow as well. 5. Trading Josh for picks is a crap shoot. Not only are locked into those player's salaries (think Marvin here) but perhaps without return. The salary you spend on the picks (5-7 million year 1 for 4 picks next year - ours and trades), but those contracts are first round selections which are guaranteed money. In year 3 those contracts eat up 10 million of the cap and my not be players worth a roster spot. You have to be sure of a player to invest a pick. Those odds go down with 3-4 pics. 6. Trading Josh now includes a trade kicker. Trading Josh after Dec next year has no kicker. There is no rush to trade Josh at 13.2 million when effectively his salary is 14.8 million in trade....very similar to next year's salary. 7. If you are building a team, trading Josh means you need a shot blocker now at 5 and a slasher at 3. You are spoiled right now in that Josh is filling both of those rolls. Al moving to the 4 is an offensive upgrade over Josh in every category except slashing (which admittedly is not important at the 4). But it means you now need a rebounding shot blocker at center and need to be more dynamic at the wing. You also lose flexibility guarding on the perimeter, (not our team strong suit to start with). What this means is you are locked into drafting for need or greed. You are drafting to fill holes, not for the best talent. 8. You now have to pay Teague and Korver next year if you want to maintain fan identity. 9. Ivan Johnson now has you by the Huevos. 10. Zaza Pachulia now becomes even more important because if you lose Gortat (or similar for the season) your season is lost. I could go on but looking at it like a GM (God view - total responsibility), moving Josh is much riskier than fans are realizing.