Kirk Hinrich will be on the market!

[Admin]

It will cost more in revenue when we lose Childress without replacing him and lose wins and lose fans from attending the games, miss the playoffs, etc.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

It will cost more in revenue when we lose Childress without replacing him and lose wins and lose fans from attending the games, miss the playoffs, etc.

So the fans are coming to see Childress? I think that is news to everyone here.

I don't know where you get the idea that Childress is contributing to wins. His +/- is lame and the Hawks have played just fine when he has been either absent or a non-factor.

[Admin]

No, the fans come to see the Hawks win and you are mistaken if you think the Hawks will be just fine without him. It really baffles me how you can defend Marvin to no end and yet you feel that Childress is absolutely worthless when the truth is that they are both worth somewhere in between.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

No, the fans come to see the Hawks win and you are mistaken if you think the Hawks will be just fine without him. It really baffles me how you can defend Marvin to no end and yet you feel that Childress is absolutely worthless when the truth is that they are both worth somewhere in between.

The Hawks played some of their best ball of the year when Childress was out. He scored only 10 pts total in games 3 and 4 against Boston but the Hawks still won. He got only 2 pts and 1 rebound when we beat Philly on the road last month.

As far as Marvin goes he is actually getting better. Childress only scored 1.8 more ppg than he did as a rookie. Marvin's scoring has gone up noticably and he is adding things to his game. Childress has added nothing.

We are a weak perimeter shooting team and Marvin scores over 4 times as many points from the perimeter as Childress. Marvin also does a much better job on the defensive glass.

Marvin is 3 years younger than Childress and he isn't a free agent right now. I don't know how i can make it any simpler for you.

[Cwell]

I don't want Childress gone but if he is and Woody stays then it will prevent him from playing him at PG.

[thefloydian]

Quote:

---

It will cost more in revenue when we lose Childress without replacing him and lose wins and lose fans from attending the games, miss the playoffs, etc.

I doubt this.

Plus, the reason I think we should let him go is because more than likely, after we resign Smith and sign David Andersen, there's not even going to be enough left for Childress. If there is, we should spend that money on a position of need.

[dig]

It we don't re-sign Childress we will be left with nothing... we don't have the cap space to get one of these mythical players you see addressing the Hawks' weaknesses. Our MLE will be used on David Andersen (or someone else of lesser skill) and we will have the LLE...

Who could we possible sign (in the real world, with a salary cap) with the MLE or LLE that helps us more than Childress? If Chill's offers are in the $6M range that's certainly reasonable for what he does... we all know he can't shoot and is outmuscled by bigger forwards on D, but he is effective without needing the ball (rare for a wing) in that he moves around and makes himself available, gets a ton of putbacks on the offensive glass, and can D up quicker guys on the perimeter.

Even an offer in that range isn't terrible for a 6th man, so if Marvin develops this season or if we go after someone next summer Chill's salary won't tie us down. Of course, if someone throws $10M at him we'll pass....

[thefloydian]

Quote:

---

It we don't re-sign Childress we will be left with nothing... we don't have the cap space to get one of these mythical players you see addressing the Hawks' weaknesses. Our MLE will be used on David Andersen (or someone else of lesser skill) and we will have the LLE...

Who could we possible sign (in the real world, with a salary cap) with the MLE or LLE that helps us more than Childress? If Chill's offers are in the $6M range that's certainly reasonable for what he does... we all know he can't shoot and is outmuscled by bigger forwards on D, but he is effective without needing the ball (rare for a wing) in that he moves around and makes himself available, gets a ton of putbacks on the offensive glass, and can D up quicker guys on the perimeter.

Even an offer in that range isn't terrible for a 6th man, so

if

Marvin develops this season or if we go after someone next summer Chill's salary won't tie us down. Of course, if someone throws $10M at him we'll pass....

I don't get what you're saying here. I'm admittedly ignorant of NBA Salary Cap stuff, but are you saying that we can sign Childress for less money than other players because he's on our team right now? I don't get why Chill will automatically be a better value than any other free agent we were to sign.

If you're just saying there aren't any free agents in our price range that better address our weaknesses, then I can understand that (although I don't know if that's the case), but otherwise, I don't get your argument.

[dig]

Quote:

---

I don't get what you're saying here. I'm admittedly ignorant of NBA Salary Cap stuff, but are you saying that we can sign Childress for less money than other players because he's on our team right now? I don't get why Chill will automatically be a better value than any other free agent we were to sign.

If you're just saying there aren't any free agents in our price range that better address our weaknesses, then I can understand that (although I don't know if that's the case), but otherwise, I don't get your argument.

We will be over the salary cap after we re-sign Josh Smith, so we cannot sign any free agents. Josh Childress is an exception because he is currently one of our players, so we can re-sign him even though we're above the cap (the so-called Larry Bird exception). He's a restricted FA so we can sit back and see what other teams offer him, and we have the right to match any of those offers.

You are also allowed a MLE (mid-level exception), which is supposed to be roughly equal to the average NBA salary, that allows you to sign one player each year to that salary even if you are above the cap. This would hopefully be for David Andersen If he stays in Europe we trade his rights, the Hawks could target someone else (pickin's are slim for this)...

You also get an LLE ($1.9M) but it's hard to find a non-scrub for that role unless some vet wants a shot at a championship, and I promise you no ones coming to ATL for that....

[thefloydian]

Would we have to pay the luxury tax for Childress if we resigned him?

If you guys are right and it's an either or type of thing where we either Sign Childress or we sign no one, then I might lean more toward signing him, but that's the first I've heard of it.

[dig]

Quote:

---

Would we have to pay the luxury tax for Childress if we resigned him?

If you guys are right and it's an either or type of thing where we either Sign Childress or we sign no one, then I might lean more toward signing him, but that's the first I've heard of it.

It depends on how much we sign him, Josh Smith, and DA for (or whoever else we sign with the MLE & LLE). The luxury tax will be around $71M..... if we sign those three guys & maybe Salim or another cheap guy, my guess is we'll be around $74M ($51M now + $10M +$5M +$6M +$2M).

This means we're only paying ~$3M in luxury tax, and for one year, to have a better team than we had this past season (a full year of Bibby, Acie healthy and hopefully better, DA). If Woody is back it might not make much of a difference, but I'm hoping if the ASG is so confident in Woody they'll be willing to pay an extra $3M to help him this season...

[dig]

One other thing... it's possible Chill doesn't get more than the MLE as an offer, in which case we could give him our MLE and not sign David Andersen... I could see the cheap a$$ ASG doing this in a heartbeat to avoid the luxury tax...

We could also trade the rights to DA and get a late first-round pick (he may be worth it to some teams, like Hou @ #25 or NJ @ #21 or even Cle @#19, who want a vet). Who knows, maybe even Kerr will give us our pick back for DA. You are allowed to sign your first-round pick (but not a second rounder) even if you're above the cap...

[thefloydian]

Man, we better not bail on Andersen. I want to see what he can do.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Would we have to pay the luxury tax for Childress if we resigned him?

If you guys are right and it's an either or type of thing where we either Sign Childress or we sign no one, then I might lean more toward signing him, but that's the first I've heard of it.

It depends on how much we sign him, Josh Smith, and DA for (or whoever else we sign with the MLE & LLE). The luxury tax will be around $71M..... if we sign those three guys & maybe Salim or another cheap guy, my guess is we'll be around $74M ($51M now + $10M +$5M +$6M +$2M).

This means we're only paying ~$3M in luxury tax, and for one year, to have a better team than we had this past season (a full year of Bibby, Acie healthy and hopefully better, DA). If Woody is back it might not make much of a difference, but I'm hoping if the ASG is so confident in Woody they'll be willing to pay an extra $3M to help him this season...

We have $51 million committed to 8 players next year. If we resign both Josh's and sign Andersen then we are already paying the luxury tax and have only 9 players. that means every other player we add to the roster will cost us double due to the luxury tax.

[dig]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Would we have to pay the luxury tax for Childress if we resigned him?

If you guys are right and it's an either or type of thing where we either Sign Childress or we sign no one, then I might lean more toward signing him, but that's the first I've heard of it.

It depends on how much we sign him, Josh Smith, and DA for (or whoever else we sign with the MLE & LLE). The luxury tax will be around $71M..... if we sign those three guys & maybe Salim or another cheap guy, my guess is we'll be around $74M ($51M now + $10M +$5M +$6M +$2M).

This means we're only paying ~$3M in luxury tax, and for one year, to have a better team than we had this past season (a full year of Bibby, Acie healthy and hopefully better, DA). If Woody is back it might not make much of a difference, but I'm hoping if the ASG is so confident in Woody they'll be willing to pay an extra $3M to help him this season...

We have $51 million committed to 8 players next year. If we resign both Josh's and sign Andersen then we are already paying the luxury tax and have only 9 players. that means every other player we add to the roster will cost us double due to the luxury tax.

You're just restating what I mentioned above.... If Chills puts us at $74M our luxury tax will be $3M, hypothetically. That means we pay our $74M in salaries and a $3M tax on top (hence the term). Obviously adding any more salary (via trades, LLE) would add to the tax since we're above the threshold.

I have yet to hear how we can improve our team if we let Chill walk...

[exodus]

Quote:

---

You're just restating what I mentioned above.... If Chills puts us at $74M our luxury tax will be $3M, hypothetically. That means we pay our $74M in salaries and a $3M tax on top (hence the term). Obviously adding any more salary (via trades, LLE) would add to the tax since we're above the threshold.

I have yet to hear how we can improve our team if we let Chill walk...

First of all letting Chill walk pretty much makes it a sure thing the defense will be better. It also means the floor will be space better on offense since Childress can't even make 1 jumper per game.

We can add a 3 pt shooter to spread the floor (preferably who can back up the 1 and 2 like Roger Mason) and a big with legit size (like Mbenga) to bang against some of the bigger centers in the league and reduce the wear on Horford. I'd also like to see West back as a defender off the bench . Those three combined would probably cost less than Childress and fill specific roles on the roster.