thecampster

Team makeup...salary.Basically, the LT is 70 million (give or take).A team must carry 13 players. That means an average salary of 5.384 million. So when looking at Korver/Williams. Those are average NBA salaries.Now when you sign someone, you look at their number vs the average. Signing a good vet for 2.5 million, changes the percentage per person you can spend on everyone else up a little bit up to 5.625.The same rule applies when signing people to big contracts. This is what people pissed about Joe don't understand. 70 million 13 players is 5.384 million. Every salary slot is slightly more than the MLE. Give out a 20 million dollar contract. You now have 50 million for 12 players or 4.15 million per player. Your average is less than the MLE. This is significant because the best non stars can sign with any team in the league for the MLE. If you can't give that, you can't work. Complicating this is the cap threshold. 58 million. Let's focus on what Josh, Al, Joe did to this number....20 + 13 +12. That's 45 million. Add Marvin and Zaza and bam..you are at the CAP. Now you can technically only sign vet mins and exemption players. It is more complicated than that, but that's the math of it. Now using that model, replace Joe with a 2 million dollar player. That 18 million freed could be used to upgrade Marvin, Zaza. Or...2 - 14 million dollar players at the 3 and or 2 and 5. It isn't being cheap, its being frugal. Saving here to spend there. The Hawks went the other route 2 years ago. They spent first and hand to scrimp later.

This is why I hate the draft and free agent period being immediately after the season ends. 3 months is a long time for people to prognosticate without anything to go on. Do people realize it's been 37 days since FA technically began? So many thoughts and opinions get thrown out and by October 1st, people start believing that a lineup of Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Chauncey Billups, Derrick Rose and Jeff Teague is not only possible but a reality in their home town and a title contender. All they need is to make a few well placed trades.

I'm looking at their roster and I'm scratching my head a bit.The Nets were 22-44 last year. That's a 27 win team in a normal year.I took a second and looked at what they had. I used as an example a few games in January.They startedWilliamsMarshonWallaceHumphriesShelden WilliamsSo swap Lopez for Williams and Joe for Marshon. I get that.Then I look at the bench, they lose Morrow, Farmar, Petro, Williams, Williams and I wonder how much of an improvement they really made. I think they gain 10 points a game on the starters as Joe, Lopez will take shots from Wallace/Humphries but they gain some on the starters, but I think the bench is worse. I'm just wondering if they're 28 games better (50 wins). Enough to equal the Hawks. I just don't think its as much as people think. Also, they're so dependent on Williams. If anything happens to him, they're done.

I am a Harris fan and I expect our board will quickly be jumping on his bandwagon after only a few games.

Been trying to find the ending of the story but there is none I can find. There is no question he can play. The question is where would Ivan bury the body.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/boxscore;_ylt=AiWj2e.ccSDf42rTMPwpF_ikvLYF?gid=2012031805This game...next to last game against the Hawks last year. 20/9 in 36 minutes. That's why they are high on him. What they forget is the the next game against the Hawks he was 1-9 for 9 points but with 13 rebounds. He just needs work.

No the marketing of the NBA is about speed and flexibility....fun to watch players. Fun to watch isn't what wins championships. To quote an old board saying from a sig. Stolen from Pat Summitt. "Offense sells tickets, defense wins games, rebounding wins championships." -Pat Summitt, University of Tennessee Lady Volunteers How do you rebound? You get a legit center who controls the glass, a power forward who will box out and a small forward who will jump more than once.

SMH 3 years - great production. 6 year all star. notice how the numbers don't add up. Take the craziness out and answer this question. Which of these years is a shoe in all star year? If Joe Bagodonuts put up these numbers, is he an all star? 18.8 / 3.7 / 3.9 18.2 / 4.0 / 4.7 20.2 / 4.1 / 6.5 Also notice the 4 year numbers trend. Just say it....it was time.

OMG read the article. Joe and Josh were trying to push, Teague was being passive. Teague admits as much. I took some heat for my Harris starts over Teague if we only run one at a time comment. But this is it right here. If you are Jeff, you go get it. You run the show. If you don't display confidence that you can get it up the court and give it back to the finisher, he will never give it to you. Point Guard is a floor general, not an errand boy.

Yes we do. We are not the Heat. When you have Lebron, Jordan, etc then yes you can get away with not having a legit center. Even the Bulls had Cartwright then Perdue, legit 7 footers. The Heat win was both an anomaly and a credit to the ridiculous effort by James/Wade in the playoffs.

That sir is an easy answer. Josh and Teague matured. They were the only 2 to play every game. They accounted for 32.5% of the team scoring for the year. 39% of the team assists. 29.1% of the rebounds. 37.1% of the steals and 50.1% of the blocked shots. made 33% of the team free throws and neither got the freebies at the end of the game. Shot a combine 47% from the floor. This is what happened, Teague and Smith put the team on their backs this year and refused to lose. Smith on a bum knee, Teague with shaky 3 pointer confidence and 2 players constantly barking at him. JJ did his job...he helped the baby hawks grow up.

10th in Guards is 25th in NBA fan voting when considering Center, Forwards, Guards. Fans vote based on scoring and whose name they hear on SportsCenter. Your guy is still 25th in that list then. I think this is what frustrates more people on this board then anything. The Hyperbole vs the realism. It's always JJ is the greatest or JJ sucks. The realists say, he was a very good player who wasn't worth his contract and in a team world, that matters. To get better, we must drop JJ and replace him with a better sum of parts. The same is said for Josh, Al, Marvin. Marvin was a decent player and will do well in Utah. Marvin was worth 7.5 million based on potential but not production. It's fair to say that. It's fair to say flipping Marvin's contract for Harris is a win for the Hawks because Harris makes people better. Josh is my favorite player. I see him as a complete sum of parts in one. Good defense, good offense, good passing, etc....not great at anything except weak side help. But people on the board feel the need to say "terrible BBIQ", he's awful, etc. Or with Al...he's boring, just consistent, not big enough, etc. I believe in fair assessment....a player is what a player is. Be honest. JJ is not a superstar. He's a good player, worth Al/Smoove money and lucky to be in those 6 all star appearances...He probably deserved 3 for sure. But he is not a superstar, not a max contract guy and would experience a deteriorating skill set with an inflating contract. It's easy to say Diesel, just try....say...."It was time!"

Scrub,What you must realize is the JJ's legacy thread is a compliment to Horf, Smoove, Teague, etc. JJ's legacy means his time in Atlanta is over. That isn't possible if Al and the gang haven't arrived. It's very common in society that a good father raises sons that accomplish more than he does. That good father may not be a superstar financially, mentally or in other ways but he instills in his sons a few things more than he got from his dad. This is kind of like I see Joe. Joe really wasn't worth the money he got or the all star nods but he took what he had and didn't screw up the kids. This is so common in the NBA. Players come in and get their first paycheck and get fat, high or lazy. Joe's was just professional. It helped keep the egos in check. We hit our ceiling and that's actually a testament to Joe. Some teams never reach their ceiling. I think a great example of this is the Wizards the last 5 years. They invested in a bad egg in Gilbert Arenas. There was no good leader on that team. The players that followed, "namely Blatche, McGee", ran hog wild and killed coaches and team success. Joe having a legacy means Horford, Smith, Teague have arrived and grown up to be fine young NBA adults. That isn't a bad legacy to have.

JJ didn't bring a title, his era is marked by playoff mediocrity and complaints from many fans but I think there may be a silver lining to JJ's tenure that needs to be addressed.When JJ arrived, we were going through a rebuilding period. We drafted a great deal of young talent and then spent the next several years filtering those draft picks into building blocks and trade worthy commodities. All the while, JJ mentored those players that would stay. He stayed calm, did his job and displayed professionalism.Zaza was brought in as a very young player during his time here, Smoove, Al, Teague were drafted. Everyone else has moved on. Those players learned to win in the NBA while JJ did what JJ does. It wasn't always pretty, but I think perhaps this is a natural progression. JJ served his purpose and helped groom 4 NBA pros who will hopefully now take the reigns in his absence.It is very common in today's NBA that players with loads of talent never find their way to the playoffs and make mistakes in diet, dedication and work ethic. They never realize that just making it to the NBA is just the beginning. But in Al, Josh you see two players that work on their body and game every off season. I think maybe this can be attributed to JJ's influence. If there was anything JJ did, is he worked in the off season.I believe JJ's time probably passed a season or two ago but hopefully, his calm steady presence will be felt after he's gone in the leadership provided by Al, Josh, Zaza and Jeff. If that is the case, then maybe the investment in JJ was a better deal than I give it credit for.

I really like this.

But my argument was that Teague doesn't start over Harris...they're on the court together. One subs out early and one replaces the other but both will get 30 minutes plus and start. Harris makes others better. Not starting him is just plain stupid..

Because they're obviously better. The basis of the argument presented is, he earned the right to start. But with a player you'd agree is better, obviously not. Teague last year averaged 12.6 / 4.9 as the full time starter getting 33 minutes a night. Harris has averaged better than that for his career. Harris over the last 3 years. 14.5 ppg and 6.3 apg in 31 minutes. He's better. It's very simple. 1.9 more points and 1.4 more assists in 2 less minutes = better. more points, more assists in less time over a bigger sample = better. Last year he did what he was asked to do and deferred, playing on 27 minutes a game and still had 11.3 and 5. 6 less minutes a game and only 1.3 less points, .1 more assists. Harris is better.

Hmm...was news to me....still could be used in a simultaneous trade.

If the other PG was name Deron Williams or Chris Paul you wouldn't say he's earned the right to start over them. Harris is better. Harris makes more money. Harris is an expiring trade part at the deadline and the missing piece for a borderline team needing a point guard. He'll be showcased.

I tend not to listen to speculative comments from journalists in articles. When they say, 'the feeling I got from Ferry" or "what I think he meant" it's just pure speculation and the journalist projecting. Harris is low star level talent and suggesting he come off the bench is ridiculous. You don't need a super 6th man...you have Lou, Korver, Jenkins. Harris on the bench getting less than 30 minutes a night is a waste. Harris > Teague at this point. If anything, Drew makes the decisions and a smart decision if only running one point is Harris over Teague.

There are nuances to trade exceptions. Notably, the exception will need to be used this year. We will go "under" the cap next year and the exception will in essence, disappear.So what does this tell you? The Hawks gave up NO salary. They acquired about 2 million (depending on Willie's salary) in leeway on making a trade. So previously when you saw the Hawks projections of "assets" in going after Dwight, Bynum, others, we were only allowed to use 4 players under contract and 1 sign and trade player. This is one of the 'variables' I think mace was explaining to Dolfan about getting around the sign and trade rules. In this case, the Hawks are given a little less than a year to fill the void in the trade for Green essentially absorbing it into another deal. They can still sign and trade a player into that deal "or" trade one of our previously traded for players along with the exception.Examples: They could now trade Petro's 3.5 million, Green's 2ish million for a player worth 150% of that salary or about an 8.25 million dollar player. Or say parlay Harris 8.5 plus the 2 mil into a 15 million dollar player.This is highly creative on Ferry's part if this is why he did it. Using the Dwight scenario. We were previously required to send 12.8 million to Orlando to bring back Dwight and about 15 million for Dwight, Duhon. Horford/Teague wouldn't net that. But this "exception" if 2 million would up Atlanta's kitty to 16.5 million when packaged with Horford/Teague or 9.7 with Zaza / Teague, etc. Zaza/Teague/Horford is about19.7 in salary, bringing back roughly 29.5. But add in the "exemption and those 3 brings back 32.5 million in salary, or enough to bring back Dwight and Hedo. I'm just thinking out loud here but there is no reason for Ferry to do this unless he is expecting to use that exception. This was an excellent GM move and one BK/Sund would either not make or let the exemption expire.

We usually plan it around the season's beginning...about 2 games a year but some of the guys meet up for other games as well. As of yet, I haven't made it out for a group night. We're plenty big now we could probably benefit from the group rates. We did that about 3 years ago if I remember.

Well that was an easy find. http://www.basketbal...p?articleid=630 Hoping the graphic showed. This was a study done of the Tar Heals in 2009. As you can see by the graphic, the longer the possession, the worse the result. Notice what happens if you attempt a shot in the first 10 seconds of possession. This is what I'm hoping to see from the Hawks. Take care of the ball, quick possessions beating the other team up the floor. This was by far our biggest problem last year. We took far too long to get into offensive sets. Too much iso, too much walking the ball up. The reason this works is simple. Fast possessions tend to beat the big men up the floor leading to poorer interior defense on the attempt.

Any coach who knows anything will tell you that the most important thing to playing defense, is to make your own shots and take care of the basketball. Missed shots lead to rebounds, bad ball handling leads to steals. Both lead to transition opportunities. Limiting turnovers is job one. But just as important is limiting bad possessions.It's going to take some time to find but there are pretty detailed stats out there that show what percentage of points per possession are scored off of turnovers, rebounds and out of bounds plays. In general, hold on to the basketball and convert at the offensive end and defense becomes much easier.This is what I like about the coming Hawks squad. We've been a good turnovers team the last few years, but our execution has been sub par. I believe with the superior shooting on this team, the much better ball handling and point play, we are going to be much more efficient on offense and by extension, limit the freebies at the other end.

Totally obsolete since we were also playing without Al at the time as well, but Joe missed 6 of 7 games between Feb 22 and Mar 7 last year. In the one game he played in, we lost. In the other 6 games, we went 4-2. Here are Josh's stats during that span. 9 of 19.5 for 46.5% shooting. Main focus of the offense, double teamed just like Joe. 23.2 ppg 10.8 rpg 3 apg I think if Josh averaged 23/11/3 next year people would be alright with it. Not going to happen and moot because Al wasn't playing, Josh had to dominate for us to win 4 of 6 but too much is made of Josh's shooting. The guy just wins.