thecampster

Our major offseason addition is the subtraction of a chemistry killing head coach. Yeah, I said it. The Hawks are in a very interesting position. Assuming players do what they are supposed to do in the offseason, only Bibby and Mo Evans are older in a bad way. Every other player is on the improving end of their aging (or in Crawford and JJ's case, at his peak). So for starters the Hawks should should get better with Al, Josh, JT0, Marvin, Zaza all one year older, smarter and better. The biggest addition the Hawks could make in my humble opinion would be to bring back Josh Childress. If Josh Smith is our energy player our super hero that turns the tide of the game, then Josh Childress was his sidekick that always had a spare utility belt to throw him. I can't tell you how many times I watched the Hawks losing 4th quarter leads last year on easy baskets in the lane, bad switches, poor wing defense and lack of energy and all I could think was, "Josh Childress would have had that one!"

I would disagree. It's not cut and dry. They bring different things to the table. To me, Al is very mechanical in his approach in the post and it throws off the timing to the offense. This is why you don't see many plays where we dump the ball in low to Al. Josh is a superior passer and decision maker which is why you don't see offensive sets run through Al. Al rebounded more based on positioning in Woody's offense. I think Al plays within himself much better and obviously is a better midrange shooter. But to say Al is hands down better than Josh and the majority of posters agree is not accurate. Statistically speaking, Josh had more points, assists, steals, blocks. All significantly more. Al got 1.2 more rebounds per game. Al shoots a better free throw percentage and a better percentage from the floor. Al turns the ball over less but that's mainly because he isn't given the roll of passer near as much. Josh also got to the line 150 more times which leads you to believe he was more active offensively. I'm not saying one is more valuable than the other, I like both players fine, but to say Horford is "Superior" to Smith and the majority of posters agree isn't really accurate. I think people get tied up in Josh's inability to accept his role on the team offensively (which is reason one for the whining) and his problem with inequity with foul calls (reason 2) that lead to his mini tantrums and forget his physical impact on the game. Statistically, Josh was 3rd in points, 1st in steals, 1st in blocks, 2nd in assists and 2nd in rebounds on the team. Taking those stats deeper, Josh accounted for 42% of the teams blocks, 22% of the teams steals, 20.6% of the team's rebounds,19.1% of the teams assists and 15.2% of their points. That's a monstrous impact on the game that can not easily be replaced. I contend he makes everyone else around him better and would be sorely missed were he not on the floor for us next year. I would say the same for Al, but Al does not have the total impact on the game that Josh does.

JackB1 is to Smoove as Diesel is to Marvin. I really don't understand your hatred of Smith. They are not mutually exclusive players. You can like Smith and Horford...it's okay, try it.

It's because he's an ungrateful, spiteful S.O.B. His treatment of the fans at the end of the season should have precluded him from this kind of offer in the first place.

That's not totally unreasonable. 5 years, starting at 6.7 million with 8 percent raises annually would get you about 40 million. A little less than Marvin.

Bynum's repeated health issues would make this a non starter for me despite him being an obvious talent.

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/67688/20100701/hawks_offer_to_johnson_does_not_yet_include_6th_season/ According to the knicks

for the purposes of the cap, Chillz has a cap hold right now of 10.9 million dollars. We'd be in a better situation to sign him than to let him sit out there in Greece. although we aren't currently paying him, that number is eating at our cap. So if we signed Chillz for 5 million, technically we get 5.9 million better towards the cap.

You stated opinion, I stated statistical fact. Josh Smith was better for this team last year than Joe Johnson, both in the regular season and the playoffs and Josh made 10.8 million. Joe did not earn a max deal and his stats are inflated due to how much he had the ball in his hands. Many of his assists are due to people bailing him out with less than 5 seconds on the clock, his points are inflated due to shots taken/minutes played.

you're kidding right? Seriously, did we watch the same season? JJ scored 5.6 more points per game than Josh Smith but took 5.9 more shots to do it even though he made 129 more 3 pointers. That's terrible offensive efficiency. JJ only got 27 more assists as the main ball handler than a power forward. Josh grabbed 352 more rebounds, had 48 more steals, 168 more blocked shots. What season did you watch? It was Josh that had 2 putback dunks to win ballgames. It was Josh's defensive plays that turned around rallies by the other squads and it was Joe Johnson folding like a lawn chair in the 4th quarter that had the Hawks losing 4th quarter leads resulting in losses all season. Iso Joe was the culprit in countless losses this season. Don't believe me. Go back and read the board in March and April. Joe was at best co-mvp with Crawford, Horford and Smith. 30 times last season when you include the playoffs, Joe Johnson shot 40% or lower for a game. 6 of those he shot under 30%. He only played in 87 games total....30 times he shot 40% or lower. 35% of the time, your top shot taker is going to shoot less than 40% from the floor but is going to average only 3.5 Free Throws a game. Joe scored 1619 points last year on 1386 attempts for 1.17 points per attempt. By comparison, a real max player (Kobe) average 1.26 points per attempt. The reason, he gets to the line when he's not shooting well. don't get me wrong. Joe Johnson is a good player but you don't pay players the max that are not the type that can lead you to a championship

And I contend that JJ is not responsible for the 50+ wins. The first year we had JJ we added Marvin and Zaza and still only won 26 games. Most people here forget that. Most people here forget that joe is the least efficient player with his shots of our top 4 scorers because he can not consistently get to the free throw line. Most people here forget how he dissed the fans, that the players in the locker room don't like him because he's a loner and most don't remember the ball pounding till there's 5 seconds on the clock and then pass it to Smith at the 3 point line. Joe is not worth anything close to the max. When you pay Joe that kind of money, you are telling every other player on the team if they equal Joe's stats, they're worth the same. Josh Smith, Al Horford, Jamal Crawford are are arguably just as important to the teams success. Paying Joe the max will lose you one of those 3 players in the next two years.

The article says, The Atlanta Hawks were set to officially extend a six-year, approximately $120 million offer to retain free agent Joe Johnson at 12:01 a.m. Thursday, a person with knowledge of the offer told CBSSports.com. Such an offer would constitute the maximum-salary contract that the Hawks can pay Johnson. Translation: We heard from a guy that they could do it. It's not official per this article.

But because you are over the cap, you can only get value for value when trading. So I stand by the statement that giving a non max type player 33-40% of your available cap is lunacy.

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 Jordan Crawford - 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.

In the vacuum of New Orleans and Atlanta being the only teams in the league, yes this trade could get done. Now let's consider the other 28 teams out there. Can those teams put together a package that better fits New Orleans needs than Craw and Smoove. I would think there are 10 other teams out there hurting at the point and center position enough to give up their own grandmother to get these 2. Mark Cuban would resell his soul and future unprotected draft picks to the devil to acquire Chris Paul and a defensive center. Josh and Crawford would not get it done when you consider the market. Josh is my favorite Hawk, but I'm smart enough to know that Josh < CP3. Crawford can score but scorers are in much greater supply than shot blockers. Okafor is 28 and puts up comparable stats to Al Horford. He averages a double double and blocks 1.8 shots a game. In the world of the NBA that's greater than a 30 year old undersized less than stellar defensively shooting guard no matter how good at scoring that guard is. Here's the bad news. This trade is much better than some of the lunacy on this board of late. As far as your "you won't last long on this site comment". I've been around for 8 years.

Okay, thank you for your opinion. Now would you like to elaborate where I'm wrong? and it's You're not ur and it's post not postt.

Let's just take a look at the ridiculous trades you guys are proposing, one Hawks player at a time. Trade Josh Smith - The Atlanta Hawks were 10th in points given up last year. Josh Smith and Al Horford were the only players that had had a minus for the team when they were out of the game. That's right, when Smith and Horford were in the game, we had the best +/- and when they were out we had our worst. So you want to trade away one of the two best glues to our defense. We'd be bottom 5 in the league in defense without either. Basketball is much more than just can you score. Trade Marvin Williams - Williams only makes 7.5 million. That means you are only going to take back a player that makes similar money. Who are you going to get for Marvin money? Any trade involving Marvin Willaims when the team pushed him to 5th option on offense status would net you nothing. If you really want to trade Marvin than you need to invest in boosting his number by giving him touches, running plays for him. You have to get value and at his salary you will never get value back. Trade Mike Bibby - To who. Bibby makes a very reasonable 5.5 million but again, who wants him that can give us back a quality player at 5 million per. Zaza - Probably our 2nd most marketable piece because he's a fiesty, solid big at a cheap price and is still relatively young. If you want to get rid of Bibby or Marvin, you have to trade Zaza to bump up the salaries to get back a good enough player in return. Childress - Childress has to agree. He's got free agent rights He isn't going anywhere he doesn't want to. Mo Evans - 2.5 million expiring. There it is guys. There is your most marketable trade piece. Stop it with all the trade people away for stars threads. You can't get value based on our past iso Joe offense and switching defense.

For the last time. The Hawks will not offer JJ the max or the deal would be done. there would be no reason to do the free agency thing. We offered 4 years 60 million last year. Why would we lowball by 59 million dollars if we were going to shell out the max contract in the end. There is no reason to play this game. JJ is gone, deal with it.

You would not see that kind of trade without Mike Bibby being involved. Bibby has to go in any scenario that would make this team move Josh Smith. Like it or not, Josh Smith sells tickets. Owners don't trade players that sell tickets without dumping salary in the process. Additionally, there is a whole lot of offense to replace when you drop crawford and Smith from the roster. Chris Paul alone does not make that up. That starting lineup can not reliably shoot the 3 because only Horford would command a double team inside. Other than Paul, teams would play man zone and stop almost all penetration.

You know what, that just stands to explain how confusing this is. I completely forgot that when figuring it. And Hawksfanatic is right, we really wouldn't have that money which was the point of me saying "IF". JJ would have to walk and we'd have to sign Chillz on the cheap to even have cap space at all which at that low amount is really none. I just get frustrated when I keep reading what we should have done or should do. There is no room to do it and more importantly, the crowd screaming "sign JJ or else" doesn't realize the situation that puts the team in. They already have reasonable contracts on a few players and a few more are either coming off the book or are very tradeable in the next 2 seasons. But if you pay JJ 17 million a season, added to the money you will be giving Horford and adding in Josh Smith and Marvin's salary....none of those 3 are going anywhere....then you are saying this is our team for 4 years. Marvin, Josh, Al will be making a combined 33-35 million within 2 years. Add 17 million for JJ and there is no room for anyone else. Signing JJ to a max contract will handcuff the franchise for 3-5 years. Marvin isn't going anywhere is a big part of that. Love him or hate him, he makes a reasonable salary if producing, but not if he's not. If Marvin produces we hold on to him, if he doesn't, no one will want him. Josh Smith is not a tradeable commodity. He's too valuable when you consider his salary. You will never get equal value back for him. Players that produce what he does, don't make 10.8 a year, they are near max players. We all know Horford is a must keep player. So these 3 players are your franchise right now. They will hold 30+ million in Salary by the 2012 season...if you give Joe the max, you won't be able to sign/bring in another star level player without hitting the luxury tax. You are settling for above average but not great play.

Ton of talking about what we can do in a few days. I'm hoping to clear that up right now. Salary Cap - 57.7 million Josh Smith - 11.6 million J Crawford - 10.08 million M Williams - 6.7 million Mike Bibby - 5.56 million Z Pachulia - 4.25 million A Horford - 5.45 million M Evans - 2.5 million Total - 47.63 million. Space remaining 10.07 million Cap holds JJ - 14.976 million Childress - 10.89 million Jordan Crawford - .85 million empty roster spots 5 - 5x$473k = 2.36 million Assuming the rookie signs and plays (why wouldn't he?) and assuming Chillz resigns at about 5 million (his worth) which would clear his cap hold. Assuming Joe walks for nothing (clearing his cap hold once he signs elsewhere). that would put us at 47.63 + .85 + 5 + (3x473k) = 54.899 million. Leaving us 2.8 million to sign free agents. For each player signed, a 473k credit goes back toward the cap. If Chillz isn't signed or signed and traded, his cap hold eats up the rest of the cap. Regardless of what happens, We need to offer an extension to Al next year or the year after and therefore can not handcuff ourselves with salary. Now this is where it gets tricky. Assuming we resign Joe, it's going to be for 16.5 million the first year. This would undoubtedly push the Hawks with their other roster adds into the luxury tax. Before last season started, Joe was offered 4 years, 60 million dollars. His max value is 6 years 119. The teams are starting 59 million apart when negotiating. This is not a small number. Joe is leaving, get used to it. You can not bridge a 59 million dollar gap when other teams are willing to offer him the max. The only answer here is to sign and trade him to get cap value back but we don't want more than 10 million in cap value back because we need to avoid the luxury tax threshhold. So looking at it from a business standpoint, your 3 highest paid players right now are JS, MW, JC. The simple fact is that Jamal is getting paid starter money and needs to start. Bibby as your 4th highest paid starter is not producing and needs to be traded. Marvin Williams needs to step up and put up starter numbers. 10 million comes off the books next year with Jamal and Evans being FA, Bibby can be traded as an expiring contract. Quit trying to trade Marvin as his production is not worth the future cap hit to most contending teams. Only a rebuilder could afford to take him on.

Childress to Washington would have been realistic except Blatchey opted for surgery....McGee is much more needed now. Salmon is going to sign as a leftover prize for someone who loses out on the elite players in FA at 6-8 million. We can't afford him without Cap gymnastics. Sorry but this doesn't work. I'll be posting a new thread here soon talking about the cap. Check for that.

I've been trying not to start a new thread on this but anyone expecting JJ back in the ATL next year is fooling themself. We offered JJ 60 million over 4 years. That is 59 million dollars less than he can get in a 6 year deal in a sign and trade right now. Should that sign and trade be to a state without state taxes, that is an additional savings of about 7.5 million. It is in Johnson's best interest to leave Atlanta. The ownership group is not going to pay him 119 million for 6 years. Another team will. In the world of negotiating, we are $59 million apart to start with. The only reason to move on JJ's part is giving a hometown discount. He already burned that bridge with the fans. JJ is gone. Best to start deciding how to get the most out of him being gone.

What you want is Josh to share time between the 3 and the 4. You do not want him to be a 3 full time, but as the 3 he presents matchup problems for opposing 3's. He is just too strong for them to stop while moving toward the basket. He will draw fouls and force the opposing teams bigs to step out and stop his drives, cuts, posts. This is why Lebron is so successful. He is a handful for all opposing 3's.

okay...that is a better answer. So they don't have the room today but are hoping to have it soon....cool and thanks.