thecampster
-
Posts
9,309 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
45
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by thecampster
-
-
Let's remember the myriad of games missed due to injuries and the myriad of games played through injury (horf, smith, johnson, williams all played 20 or more games while nursing some ailment).
As a reminder games missed:
JJ - 10
Smith - 5
Horf - 5
Crawford - 6
Williams - 17
Hinrich/Bibby - 2
Of your top 6 in the rotation, that's 45 games missed due to injury but JJ played through the elbow injury for most of the first 18 games, Smith had bad knees for most of the last 3 months and Horford hurt his back with 25 or so games left in the year.
The previous year that group only missed 14 games due to injury. Woody had a much easier road to hoe in that sense.
-
1
-
-
There's lots of trade talks about Josh Smith and I'm not trying to talk about any specific trade of Josh. I just want to point out some of the considerations of Josh.
1. Scoring. This year, Josh's scoring went up. His FG% went down but his TS% went up. He made 33% of his three point shots which is a career high. However he shot 2 a game which is not great. Smoove have see sawed as a scorer but he still provides 16-17 ppg and in the playoffs he was more consistent than some of his teammates.
2. Rebounding. For a player that doesn't box out, he gets about 8.5 reb per game. This year, i say he was about 6'9" 240. (not 225). He had more weight to box out with.
3. Defense. I think we're seeing that Smoove's defense varies with weight and age. I don't think he's a shotblocker any longer. By the numbers, his shot blocks are the 2nd lowest of his career. Maybe that's a result of him playing more Sf. Either way, he doesn't blockem like he use to.
4. Assists. This in my opinion is the biggest plus for Smoove. Even though sometimes used recklessly, Smoove is a pretty good passer for his position. By the numbers, he actually had more assists playing for Woody the year before, I just think however, that he did make good passes in LD's system.
5. Heart. It doesn't show up on a stat sheet but I would characterize heart as doing what it takes to win. I can't help be see guys like Iverson and Jordan when I say Heart. Josh has some heart. He's willing. It hasn't translated to him conforming his game to matching the team's need yet but he's willing.
So is there danger in losing Josh Smith?
No
I think the main danger for ASG is watching your marketing cow go somewhere else.
I think the danger for the GM is losing the guy who may be able to convince Howard to choose us.
I think the danger for most fans is losing the guy who can bring excitement and change the way the team plays when he's on and focused.
Statistically...
17/9 and 48% FG shooting is not difficult to replace. However, replacing Hometown love will be hard. Still, those boneheaded shots make the love wax cold.
I'm starting to sound like a broken record here. This has to be the 5th or 6th repackaged justification on trying to trade Smith. Let me make it very clear one more time.
Josh makes about 13mil this year. JJ will make 18. You need to get back a center. Center's come at a premium. Volume shooting guards who have low points per shot efficiency numbers do not.
Pretend you want to take back Andrew Bynum. He is set to make 15 million, 2 million more than Smith. You would need to add a player. Pretend you traded JJ instead...L.A. would need to include Salary to make it work.
You will not get back Center value for Josh Smith because he doesn't make enough compared to Center premium.
Per Yahoo, pure Centers by PPG are ranked as such
D. Howard
B. Lopez
N. Hilario
A. Bogut
R. Hibbert
C. Kaman
M. Gasol
A. Bynum
E. Okafor
Those are the biggest impact centers you are going to find. Only 4 averaged more rebounds per game than Josh (Howard, Bogut, Bynum and Okafor), only 2 averaged more ppg (Howard, Lopez), only 3 averaged 2 blocks a game or more (Howard, Bogut, Bynum), none averaged 3 assists per game, all averaged betwen 1.4 and 3.6 turnovers, only 2 had more than 1 steal a game. None shot over 80% from the free throw line. Only 5 shot over 50% from the field.
Your desire to trade Josh for one of these players runs into serious problems when salary and needs are discussed. No other trade helps. You aren't getting Howard. Brook Lopez is set to make only 3million next year. Hilario is a possibility but he rebounds and scores less than Josh. Bogut is possible but there is no way Milwaukee takes Josh after the playoff blow up last year. Hibbert....lol...no way Indiana parts with him. Kaman, too old/doesn't fit/not big enough to play Dwight. Gasol, no way they trade him. Bynum, need to add a player to make salaries work, oft injured, problem child. Okafor....possible but not probable and would only be a rental as he's aging (29) and a little undersized.
You aren't going to get the center you want...Josh isn't going anywhere unless management just wants him gone.
-
Heh. We can only hope, and then maybe next on Marvin's agenda should be a heart transplant.
:sarcastichand:
I ROLF'd!!! +947 if I could.
-
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AmRhSnVSRlt9YnnmGtHEZ5q8vLYF?slug=ap-hawks-williams
Bah...merge...didn't see the other one down below.
-
You have aging star Dominique Wilkins.
At the age of 33, he's giving you 29.9 ppg, 6.8 rpg, and 3.2apg
His contract extension will be due at the end of the season. He is making 3.5 Million per year.
Currently, he's 4th in the league in ppg and he's an allstar.
Your team is atop of it's division at the time and 2nd in the conference.
Jordan has just retired.
Your team is 36-16 under new coach Lenny Wilkins
Los Angeles approach you with an offer of a 6-10 F-C who is 27 yrs old named Danny Manning.
He was a college star.
He averages 23.7ppg, 7 rpg, 4.2 apg.
He is in his contract year.
He's making 3.25 Million.
He is a fan favorite... even though attendance has started to fall drasticaly.
As far as PFs and Cs you have:
Kevin Willis
Jon Koncak
Adam Keefe
Andrew Lang
Willis is getting you 19, 12, and 2.
Los Angeles says, Manning is unhappy here. We will give you Manning for a first rounder and Nique.
As the GM (forgetting hindsight) do you make this deal?
I cried bloody murder when it happened. I'm a romantic when it comes to sports. I grew up in Chicago and watched Ryan Sandberg play nearly his whole career with the Cubs and loved it when he retired a Cub. At the same time, just before I moved to Atlanta, I watched Greg Maddux bolt town when everyone watching knew just how special he would be. Loyalty matters. It's a big reason why I want to see Josh, Al and Teague stay. I think players that start in your organization and earn their paycheck (notice Marvin's name not on my list) should get the honor of staying with the organization as long as they can. To me, that's how you win a championship. It's more than just the best players. It's building a family type of environment when people are willing to go to war with each other. High character, high effort players.
Nique was that guy. If I had a criticism of Nique when playing its that anyone who can play that good offensively as a high flyer, should have been a better player on the defensive end. Defense wins championships.
-
Name 1 guy playing in the league right now who you can replace Joe Johnson with and the Hawks win a championship??
That means you must keep our soft front court, our BBIQ, and our novice coaching.
Joe isn't a one for one trade player. You can bring back 1 player as good as Joe and 2 role players for what Joe makes.
-
I use the Milwaukee example.
Josh to Milwaukee is enough salary to net - Andrew Bogut or Maggette and Dooling or Salmons, Ilyasova and Sanders
Joe to Milwaukee is enough Salary to net - Bogut, Ilyasova, Jennings and 1million dollars of space. or Salmons, Delfina, Ilyasova and Jennings Plus 2 million in space.
No to Josh, Yes to Joe.
The problem with trading Josh is you can only take back salary for salary and 12 million will only buy you so much to fill out needs. Trading Joe, returns back 50% more player in salary.
I'm not saying who you could get in real value, I'm saying how much their salaries allow us to bring back to fill our holes. Trading Josh for a 12 million dollar player does not make us a contender.
-
It seems like Woody is wanted either:
- Detroit
- Toronto
- Minnesota.
If I were him, I would opt for the Minnesota Job.
Actually, that's not a bad gig for him.....Good chance to reprove "he" was the difference maker.
- Detroit
-
Yea, I'm sure you've been waiting all year to bring that up buuuuuuut you're playing the wrong "game" unless you were the first to make a thread on the NBA reporting about a possible amnesty clause......1 year ago *cue spooky music*. What that has to do with Marvin getting amnestied though? I don't know but I guess when you have to get your gun off you've got to get your gun off even if you miss the target.
No but now we're talking about amnesty for our stupid contracts.
No argument at all though with the current points you are making.
I think the owners are asking big with the hope of getting what they really want...
Non-guaranteed contracts.
I think they will keep a soft cap with a LT.
I just believe that they will also get N-g-contracts so that can not make Marvin Williams like mistakes again.
Atlanta was over a barrel with Marvin. He had a good contract year and looked like he was progressing but once he got the guaranteed money, he went to worse. What could they have done?
1. Let him walk?? That's 5 yrs of protecting the investment.
2. SNT him?? He looked like he could handle the position.
They had to resign him just to get their investment back.
I still contend Marvin is tradeable and could bring back good value to a young team in need of a scorer/athlete (see Minnesota/New Jersey).
-
Paging Nire, Nire to the front desk, please.
Well since he's running a lil late I'll update you.
First we had
Then later
and I'll quote myself from the first thread.
Oh man, I love this game. Here, let me quote myself from this thread from June 30 of last year.
Giving someone the max is easy when it isn't your money or worse yet it's monopoly money to most of the posters here. Here is what Giving JJ the max means. Please God let every Squawker read this in it's context.
If we give JJ the max, the last 3 years of the deal will be 20, 22, 24 million approximately. That means that one player will control 33-40% of the cap all by himself. That is lunacy. That is no way to build a team unless that player is named Kobe, Lebron, Dwayne, Dwight or a few players in their prime. Giving Joe the max is a 10 million dollar raise 6 years from now. That's not free money, it's money that is being taken away from signing other players. You can go over the cap year one to sign your own players, but after that, subsequent signs have to fit cap rules.
If you sign JJ tonight ASG, you are telling every Hawks fan, this is it. This is what you get for the next 6 years. Hawks under contract in 3 years (assuming Horford signs for similar money to Josh Smith) in 2012/2013.
JJ - 19 million
Josh - 13.2 million
Horford - 13 million
Marvin - 8.3 million
Zaza - 5.2 million
Teague - 2.4 million
"he who's name shall not be mentioned" - 1.2 million
62.3 million total - 5 million over the current cap.
That's your team guys. You sign JJ for the max and you are looking at Teague, JJ, Josh, Marvin and Horfod and absolutely no bench in 3 years. You are over the cap with 5 slots to fill. for everyone saying pay JJ the max, you are not thinking this through. This will handcuff us for years to come.
I told you so just doesn't make it taste better in my mouth though.
-
Never heard Joe complaining about playin the 2 or the 3. Never heard Josh complaining about playin the 3 or the 4. Never heard Hinrich complaining about playin the 1 or the 2. And never heard Jamal(who is not a pg), complain about playin the 2 or the 1. Just sayin. I like Horford, but just play ball man. How bout hitting the weight room and working on your post game. And btw, if you ever want to be an allstar again, better keep playin center. Just my 2 cents.
Piling on. Josh has actually played limited 5 in his time here too. Marvin played a little 2 this year when Joe was out.
For 12 million a year, someone had better be willing to play out of position and be willing to go to Waffle House with me at 3 in the morning when I call in a favor...no questions asked.
-
1
-
-
I am not a fan of second round picks. For every diamond in the rough, there are 50 - Euro Ihopehepansout.
-
I personally think this will bottom line better for the ASG in regards to the Hawks. There were many nights where Phillips looked half empty for the Hawks on a nightly basis. Many of those seats could have been bought by someone spending a $ on hockey instead. Without that option every other night, I could see a few thousand more butts in Phillips for home games. Even 2000 more fans nightly at $50 a fan is 4.2 million in sales by the end of the year and that is without the losses the Thrashers were incurring.
I hate to see the Thrashers go but this is a good business move for the Hawks.
Adding on...just found the numbers
Hawks ticket sales average per home game - 15,648. Phillips capacity 18,729. Average not sold, 3081.
That doesn't include the people who buy tickets and then don't show.
-
Pretty much the only time money ever enters or leaves the owners' personal bank accounts (figuratively speaking) is when they buy the team and sell the team. They are businessmen, and that is where they make or lose money. So it's a given that the cash is going in their pockets. That's what happens when owners buy and sell teams.
I know people around here would love to think that the money will somehow end up increasing the Hawks' payroll, but that's not the way things work in pro sports. Teams' finances are strictly separated from each other's and also from the owners' finances. This won't affect the Hawks one way or another in a financial sense.
I do think it will allow the group to focus more of its time and energy on the Hawks. Unfortunately, with this bunch, that's not a good thing. I'm in the camp of people who think ownership already meddles too much in basketball decisions, which has led to some very stupid basketball decisions.
In the end, I think the effect will be neutral.
Very true. Lost on the typical fan is the idea of "losses against budget". If the owners put a 10% profit expectancy into the budget that pays themselves a salary (IE 1 billion dollar team that's 100 million in salary) and the team loses $20 million against budget, the owners claim a loss. When in reality, there was 100 million personal investment return minus that $20 million).
Budgeting is a funny thing. If you expect to lose 20 million but break even you don't call it a 20 million dollar profit against budget, you call it breaking even. But if you expect to profit 20 million and just break even, you spin it as losing 20 million against budget.
-
It's not just laziness. Some people's ego's drive them to want to get the most exposure for their ideas as possible. So they post them where they think they'll get the most attention regardless of rules. I've noticed it for quite some time and honestly, I've replied to some. Probably shouldn't participate to clear the problem.I have stats showing how many clicks each forum gets and there are views by our members as well as search engines that routinely visit that forum. And that is all beside the point as I'm much more concerned with organization and searchability than I am with making it easier for people to only have to go into one forum because they're lazy. I'm certainly not the first to invent multi-forums either and people need to get used to it.
-
1
-
-
Just remember its 50% talent evaluation, 50% talent development....A list of hawks picks that got away and were better when they left is disappointing as well.
-
1
-
-
46 million in salary would mean you would have $12 million to play with before hitting salary cap and having to go to MLE and minimum salary players. That $12 million could be used to sign Nene or Marc Gasol or you could get 2 or more players from a pretty good list for $12 million. You could have 8 players after reaching $58 million, then use MLE to split between 2 players. That equals 10 players before you start filling the team out with draft picks and minimum guys. That would be much better than what we currently have.
Which once again is why the only player that makes sense to deal is Joe. The other players don't earn enough to create any wiggle room.
-
What you guys are failing to see is even if Joe's Salary went "poof" in the night, we would still not be able to sign free agents. Joe's money is that much. Without Joe's Salary, we still have 46 million committed to just 6 players. Add Joe in and you have 64 million in Salary, are over the cap and still need to sign 5 players. You can resign your own players and not count against the cap but it still counts against the luxury tax once you reach the threshold. Joe's Salary is the only one high enough to get back 2 quality players in return. Here are a list of hypothetical players that Joe and Marvin's salary together ='s
Lakers - Bynum, Artest, Steve Blake
Clippers - Kaman, Mo Williams and SNT Deandre Jordan
NO - Okafur, West, Jarrett Jack
Cleveland - Jamison, Varejao, and pick a scrub
New Jersey - Brook Lopez and other team's salary dump in a 3 way.
There are far mor opportunities with JJ than with the other 2 because of the total amount of salary involved. There are about 6 teams far under the cap that will take him off our hands in a salary dump in exchange for draft picks and or other team's getting involved to dump their salary to us.
-
Or move 1 to get back 2. Josh Smith to the Cavs for #4 and Varaejo. Then trade the 4th pick, 2011-12 2nd, and 2012-13 1st to Twolves for #2 and take Derrick Williams.
You get a starting SF Derrick Williams and Varaejo.
I can't see the Cavs doing that deal but okay, awesome if they do.
-
there is math to the trade Josh, Al or Joe argument that most people seem to ignore.
Assuming moving Marvin is also on the table.
The Hawks need to move 2 players and get back 3 to better facilitate salary spread on the roster. They are going to have too many vet min players next year the way they are going.
Trading Joe/Marvin - 25.54 million in salary to work with. Needs, SG - Center - backup F
Trading Josh/Marvin - 19.9 million in salary to work with. Needs, SF - Center - backup F
Trading Al/Marvin - 19.5 million in salary to work with. Needs, Center -SF - backup F
Now when you look at that. all require a backup F. We'll assume for the same of argument that is a 3 million dollar salary.
What are better odds. Gettting a Good Center + SG with 22.5 million, Getting a good Center, SF with 16.9 million, Getting a good Center -SF for 16.5 million.
Obviously, if filling out the roster with the best talent and finding the best trading partners is the goal, trading Al is a non-starter because with us at the Luxury Tax threshhold and Al having the lowest salary, we'd get the least back.
Now what's easier to find? A good SF with 6 million less to work with or a SG with 6 million more to work with.
The answer is simple and easy....For the Hawks to take the next step and truly compete, Joe Johnson is the one that must go.
-
Why do people talk about a sign-and-trade as a viable option for Crawford? He's an unrestricted veteran free agent guard who offers volume scoring and absolutely nothing else. I see no circumstances under which a team would sign him above the mid-level.
Sorry, we're either re-signing Crawford or losing him outright. There will be no trading of him.
Agreed. I just don't see a team ponying up more than 7 million tops for Craw and probably closer to the 4.5 mil exception (not sure the exact number this year).
-
You get good value for Joe in that trade but we don't have a perimeter threat on that team assuming Crawford doesn't resign and Teague doesn't become an all star. That team has a huge flaw.
Agreed by you still have 3 spots to fill...7 million to spend and a draft pick to grab. The point was...it's doable.
Hmm...need to check the status on John Salmon.
-
I know it could and almost definitely would have set the Hawks back a year or two by letting Joe walk but I'm telling you that his contract is hurting this team big time. If he can be traded to free the Hawks of the financial shackles, it must be done. Joe has proven what he is and more importantly, what he is becoming in this league. He already seems to be on the downslide and we paid him at the wrong time. He would be perfect as a second option but he is 100%, absolutely not a max contract superstar player....yet he is paid to be.
An example of a Joe Johnson trade that works and is workable because of team issues.
http://basketball.realgm.com/tradechecker/saved_trade/5886854
Johnson, Williams for Bynum, Artest and Blake.
Now assuming you add a 3rd team that would want to make this a 3 way to make the lineups palatable, it looks like this for the Hawks on paper,
Bynum/Zaza
Horford/
Smith
Hinrich/Artest
Teague/Blake/Sy
You sit at about 65 million with 3 players to sign. Blake is signed for 3 more years at 4 million per. Artest is signed for 11-12 with a 2 year player option at 7+ million. Bynum is signed for one more year with a team option.
Assuming you would want to move Artest, you could do so for two 3-4 million per players.
Trading Joe is doable, it just comes with some obvious risks.
-
Here is where we stand next year with the Player's salary to the right and in order of most expensive to least with number of years left written to the side.
Joe Johnson - 18.04 Million (5)
Josh Smith - 12.4 million (3)
Al Horford - 12.0 million (5)
Kirk Hinrich - 8 million (expiring)
Marvin Williams - 7.5 million (4)
Zaza Pachulia - 4.75 million (3)
Jeff Teague - 1.6 million (3) (
Total - 64.27 million
Roster spots needed - 5
Resignables -
Jamal Crawford - (my opinion, will not be back)
Hilton Armstrong - (loved this kid)
Jason Collins -
Damien Wilkins - (loved what we got out of him)
Pape Sy -
Magnum Rolle -
Gone - Etan Thomas, Josh Powell
Conclusion - Too much salary for not enough talent. I think you are looking at the Hawks shopping JJ in the offseason for 2-3 players in return. We may have to give up Teague in the process to get value back or take back a short term bad contract or 2.
Do you think Smoove could get us Howard?
in Homecourt
Posted
Although I voted no, let me explain my answer.
Your question really is a 2 part question. The first question is: Is Dwight's relationship with Josh (and belief in Josh as a player + the home town angle) enough to have Dwight pass up other opportunities to play in Atlanta. That answer is an undeniable yes. Dwight hasn't had a front court player of Josh's talent to play along side with yet. The last time I would say a 4/5 combo better than that combo played together would have been Duncan/Robinson. Additionally, if you could find a way to do this without trading Al (ie by giving up Joe) a 3/4/5 of Smith/Horford/Horward would be nightmarish. All 3 players can post up their man at that position, 2 can shoot over their man (given Smoove continues to improve and Horford continues to be himself). None of those 3 players has the same game and therefore would compliment each other in a most obnoxiously fabulous fashion. Additionally, unlike Miami where all 3 stars like the ball on the same side of the floor and close to the same spots, Josh prefers the right, Howard the left, Horf the elbows. It's a floor spacing nightmare for teams. You can't double Howard because of Horf and Smith's ability to catch and finish and you can't double either Smith or Horford because then Dwight will own the board...boxing out Dwight is a team effort and you can't really stop Horf or Smith within 10 feet when moving without a front. Of course Howard would give up other options to play here.
The second question is: would Orlando under any circumstance (including a Dwight boycott) trade him interdivision. This is an undeniable "no". You could trade Orlando Joe, JT, Marvin, and three future firsts while taking back Arenas' horrendous contract and I believe Orlando would still say no. There are things about a Dwight/Smith pairing that are nightmarish far beyond the Wade/Bosh/Lebron pairing.
Defensively you can have a shot blocker on both sides of the rim allowing your guards to play crazy, upfront defense. Both players are flushers of bad shots which actually helps at the defensive end by reducing opposing fast break opportunities. they've played together before and the learning curve is low. Putting them together with any other B level player that can stretch the defense would = a dynasty type of base.
Simplifying....Could Josh make Dwight come, Yes....Could Josh make Orlando have to trade him to us, no. Orlando knows we can't just sign him because of our Joe/Horford/Williams/Hinrich contracts. They don't have to do anything. Now all that said,
Dwight/Pachulia
Horford/Armstrong
Smith/Wilkens
Hinrich
Teague
Is a scary team defensively, far better than the Bulls top tier defensive team of this year.
Financially speaking...a team makeup like that is approximately 60 million in Salary...8 players and 12 million to spend on 4-6 more before hitting the Luxury tax. Yes, that is the making of a championship roster for sure.