Cap space article.

[Admin]

They will not like paying him 12 mill plus raises. Love is already eating up almost 16 next season and their team did not made the playoffs. Now add in the fact that Rubio's recovery has been a lot slower than expected.

That ties up almost 28 million in two players on a non playoff team. Not a great situation IMO.

That's what I'm hoping and what I've read because Rubio will be getting paid pretty soon too. I would think if it were a lock that the Wolves would re-sign or match Pekovic that they would have given him an extension last year. Maybe they aren't certain that the Pek-Love front court can work long term?

[Buzzard]

Here's the thing though. Love was the one injured all last season, Love has the greatest trade value, Love has a backup that they drafted 2nd overall, Love plays at a position where there is an overabundance of performers league-wide to find replacements from and Love has already publicly complained about management making him the next likely star diva to start his own "nightmare".

So given all this, why would they give up on a 27 year old CENTER that lead them in scoring and rebounds for no compensation when he can only sign for a more cap friendly deal from an opposing team? It doesn't make sense in the least and even if your point holds true in that they don't think that that is a playoff team you still don't rid your ability of being able to trade that valuable asset later for a decent return especially when it is not constricting your cap in the present or near future.

So we don't bother making a offer. No one else does because they think like you. Minny signs him very reasonably instead and they go get a decent player with the left over money. I wish Memphis and their GM would have thought like you.

[Admin]

Uhm, when did Minnesota become this Free Agent hot spot? So Pekovic is practically the best free agent that Minnesota could hope to attain/retain in the offseason yet you think they'd let him walk to pursue.......who exactly?

You wouldn't need to tell them to tank, that team simply isn't talented enough. The whole point AHF and I are making is not throwing money away on B list and C list free agents with the express goal of only making the Playoffs so you can't use that as a point against us. That shouldn't even be the goal any longer for this team after shipping off Marvin and Joe. Al and a bunch of mid first round 1st and 2nd year players has no hope at any meaningful accomplishment in the playoffs with slim hope of even getting there in the first place. It is not difficult at all to say "hey big guy, instead of playing 40 minutes a night trying to carry these kids I suggest you take a day or 5 off to heal your nagging injuries unless risking your career for a 1st round exit sounds more appealing to you."

It's too early to say whether that team will be talented enough since we have no idea what we'll be filling the roster out with. And yes of course that team would have no shot in the playoffs but I just don't see how you can get that team to tank if they're in the running for the 6-8 playoff spot by the All-Star break. What will change that will make them tank? Do you seriously think Al is going to just stop playing games to help the team tank? I don't think he's that type of guy at all. Nor do I think our new hopefully name coach will be okay with tanking the season when he's got a shot at the playoffs.

I understand you're point and you haven't seen me say let's go pay B and C level free agents long term or big money contracts. I don't see Bynum or Pekovic as that type of FA and those are the only 2 guys I've really talked up here. I'm on the fence about giving Evans a shot but only if we aren't overpaying for him.

[Admin]

A trio of Rondo, Dwight, Josh will cost you 12/18/14 respectively. About 44 million a year. With Lou, Jenkins, Scott on the roster and 2 1st rounders you are at 53 million. You still have Teague as an asset and the 2 first rounders plus future firsts. My original point on this stated signing Reddick for about 7 million and using Teague and the 1st rounders in trades as well as sign and trades for our old talent. So picture this roster.

Rondo/Williams/Mack

Reddick/Jenkins/filler

Smith/Pick

Scott/johnson

Howard/Zaza/filler

Approximate cost - $68 million

Defensively that is probably one of the best teams the league has seen in years, is under the LT and can score from anywhere on the floor. The main problem is depth. Yes that team is a contender.

Now assume you keep Teague/Horford and lose Rondo/Johnson. You start out 3 million more in Salary. But next year you have to resign Teague and its at approximately 9-10 a year. You are in the LT.

There's only 1 guy in that starting lineup that can score from anywhere on the floor and opposing defenses would pack the paint and not allow us to score easily as we couldn't space the floor properly. Having Horford instead of Josh plus a quality scoring and defensive minded SF would be light years better than that lineup. I'm pretty sure we could trade Josh straight up in a SnT for Rondo if both teams were interested and if Josh was interested.

[Buzzard]

There's only 1 guy in that starting lineup that can score from anywhere on the floor and opposing defenses would pack the paint and not allow us to score easily as we couldn't space the floor properly. Having Horford instead of Josh plus a quality scoring and defensive minded SF would be light years better than that lineup. I'm pretty sure we could trade Josh straight up in a SnT for Rondo if both teams were interested and if Josh was interested.

No arguing with Campster. He would probably trade Rondo in a heartbeat to get Josh but not the other way around.

[MaceCase]

So we don't bother making a offer. No one else does because they think like you. Minny signs him very reasonably instead and they go get a decent player with the left over money. I wish Memphis and their GM would have thought like you.

This is a great argument you are making here. People call you and others out for speaking about Pekovic as if he's a lock to be signed and you retort with "fine don't bother". Here's the thing, I never once suggested that the Hawks shouldn't pursue Pek just like I'm not suggesting that the Hawks shouldn't go after Dwight or Lebron or Jordan but the reality of the situation is that these are not likely targets to end up in a Hawk uniform.

Not likely =/= don't bother but here's another thing, the Wolves are begging other teams to make an offer for Pekovic because it will indeed be less than what they can offer him. This, my friend, is called a bargain. Getting a top young center for barely the league average salary of players at their position. All your other arguments were nonsensical so it's not a surprise that you've settled on this somehow being the crux.

[Admin]

No arguing with Campster. He would probably trade Rondo in a heartbeat to get Josh but not the other way around.

I can see wanting Rondo for the fact that he's a great defensive player, he's a tremendous passer, he's local and he'd have great chemistry with Josh and Dwight and would probably be another reason why Dwight might want to play in Atlanta. But man that team would struggle mightily scoring and can you imagine they'd lead the league all time in complaining to the refs. They'd be great defensively there's no doubt about it but you can't win games if you can't score.

[Admin]

This is a great argument you are making here. People call you and others out for speaking about Pekovic as if he's a lock to be signed and you retort with "fine don't bother". Here's the thing, I never once suggested that the Hawks shouldn't pursue Pek just like I'm not suggesting that the Hawks shouldn't go after Dwight or Lebron or Jordan but the reality of the situation is that these are not likely targets to end up in a Hawk uniform.

Not likely =/= don't bother but here's another thing, the Wolves are begging other teams to make an offer for Pekovic because it will indeed be less than what they can offer him. This, my friend, is called a bargain. Getting a top young center for barely the league average salary of players at their position. All your other arguments were nonsensical so it's not a surprise that you've settled on this somehow being the crux.

If I remember correctly the most that any team, including the Wolves, can offer him would be $12 million. With the Wolves he'd get the extra year plus the extra 3% in raises, right? I'm not interested in doing the math to see what that would come up to, but I have to think if they really wanted to keep him for less money they would have extended him before this year was up as I believe that would have been even cheaper.

[MaceCase]

It's too early to say whether that team will be talented enough since we have no idea what we'll be filling the roster out with. And yes of course that team would have no shot in the playoffs but I just don't see how you can get that team to tank if they're in the running for the 6-8 playoff spot by the All-Star break. What will change that will make them tank? Do you seriously think Al is going to just stop playing games to help the team tank? I don't think he's that type of guy at all. Nor do I think our new hopefully name coach will be okay with tanking the season when he's got a shot at the playoffs.

I understand you're point and you haven't seen me say let's go pay B and C level free agents long term or big money contracts. I don't see Bynum or Pekovic as that type of FA and those are the only 2 guys I've really talked up here. I'm on the fence about giving Evans a shot but only if we aren't overpaying for him.

And it's even earlier to say that that team would be in contention for 6-8 seed. I'm going by what we have not what we "could" have. As is, Al, ACL injury Lou, Jenkins and two mid firsts in a weak draft is a lot easier to predict as a 10th seed than 6th. Adding a bunch of roleplayers won't change that so you would have to go after more substantial free agents (read: costly) to change the fortunes of that squad. The issue that AHF and I have is that these costly free agents will ruin the chance that the franchise has at a truly foundational player. This team doesn't have Kobe, Pau, Odom and Artest to carry the load while Bynum misses his mandatory 20 games and I do like Pek, been suggesting him all year, but can't see him being let go.

Any coach brought in will most likely be briefed on the long term plans of the franchise rather than trying to pad his resume and considering that Al almost sat out a 1st round series while being medically cleared to play and even sat out games over the last season to rest, it's not a reach to say that he gets the importance of his and the franchises future.

[Buzzard]

This is a great argument you are making here. People call you and others out for speaking about Pekovic as if he's a lock to be signed and you retort with "fine don't bother". Here's the thing, I never once suggested that the Hawks shouldn't pursue Pek just like I'm not suggesting that the Hawks shouldn't go after Dwight or Lebron or Jordan but the reality of the situation is that these are not likely targets to end up in a Hawk uniform.

Not likely =/= don't bother but here's another thing, the Wolves are begging other teams to make an offer for Pekovic because it will indeed be less than what they can offer him. This, my friend, is called a bargain. Getting a top young center for barely the league average salary of players at their position. All your other arguments were nonsensical so it's not a surprise that you've settled on this somehow being the crux.

Its not my crux. Memphis made us pay for Josh if we wanted to keep him. I had my doubts about signing him then for that much. But the asset argument won me over. How many GMs would have paid Josh 60 million? How many would be willing to pay Pekovic that kind of money?

Everyone acts like its a wash, I say there are some GMs who would have let Josh walk. I think the same for Pecovic. Minny may or may not have that GM. I think someone will offer. I hope its us.

[Admin]

And it's even earlier to say that that team would be in contention for 6-8 seed. I'm going by what we have not what we "could" have. As is, Al, ACL injury Lou, Jenkins and two mid firsts in a weak draft is a lot easier to predict as a 10th seed than 6th. Adding a bunch of roleplayers won't change that so you would have to go after more substantial free agents (read: costly) to change the fortunes of that squad. The issue that AHF and I have is that these costly free agents will ruin the chance that the franchise has at a truly foundational player. This team doesn't have Kobe, Pau, Odom and Artest to carry the load while Bynum misses his mandatory 20 games and I do like Pek, been suggesting him all year, but can't see him being let go.

Any coach brought in will most likely be briefed on the long term plans of the franchise rather than trying to pad his resume and considering that Al almost sat out a 1st round series while being medically cleared to play and even sat out games over the last season to rest, it's not a reach to say that he gets the importance of his and the franchises future.

I was just saying the 6-8 seed as you mentioned something similar as part of your tank strategy. And sure it's easy to predict that a team of 6 players would suck but we're going to have at least 13 players on the roster and the bottom 2-3 will likely be rookies who won't play a lot. I don't agree that we'd need substantial players to fill out the roster to be a borderline playoff team. We can agree to disagree here but I like the Horford / Teague / Lou / Jenkins / Scott + vets group a lot more than you do. Not enough that I think they'll be a good team, but you can just about sneak into the playoffs being under .500 in the East so that's not exactly a hard think to accomplish.

Why do you keep bringing up the issue that you and AHF have as if anything I or anyone else here is saying contradicts that? None of us are advocating signing guys who will clog up the salary cap.

You are not going to get a good coach to come in and be okay with tanking his 1st season. It's not gonna happen and that's got nothing to do with padding a resume.

[Admin]

Its not my crux. Memphis made us pay for Josh if we wanted to keep him. I had my doubts about signing him then for that much. But the asset argument won me over. How many GMs would have paid Josh 60 million? How many would be willing to pay Pekovic that kind of money?

Everyone acts like its a wash, I say there are some GMs who would have let Josh walk. I think the same for Pecovic. Minny may or may not have that GM. I think someone will offer. I hope its us.

I agree and feel the same way that they may not match a max offer for him.

[MaceCase]

If I remember correctly the most that any team, including the Wolves, can offer him would be $12 million. With the Wolves he'd get the extra year plus the extra 3% in raises, right? I'm not interested in doing the math to see what that would come up to, but I have to think if they really wanted to keep him for less money they would have extended him before this year was up as I believe that would have been even cheaper.

A max starting salary for him would be 13.7 mil. I can't figure out why exactly people think he's restricted to 12 million because he's a 2nd rounder though. I think it's a confusion over the Arenas Rule which addresses 2nd rounders with only 2 years in the league and thus no Bird rights but Pek has played 3 seasons so should qualify. I know Fanatic pulled a Nic Cage in National Treasure and stole the CBA but I'm sure I could pick his pocket.

[MaceCase]

I was just saying the 6-8 seed as you mentioned something similar as part of your tank strategy. And sure it's easy to predict that a team of 6 players would suck but we're going to have at least 13 players on the roster and the bottom 2-3 will likely be rookies who won't play a lot. I don't agree that we'd need substantial players to fill out the roster to be a borderline playoff team. We can agree to disagree here but I like the Horford / Teague / Lou / Jenkins / Scott + vets group a lot more than you do. Not enough that I think they'll be a good team, but you can just about sneak into the playoffs being under .500 in the East so that's not exactly a hard think to accomplish.

And I don't see that team as being better than this year's Bucks or Sixers team from a talent standpoint. We can agree to disagree but the only gamechanger in that list is Al and I don't think he alone with a worse supporting cast can add that many wins.

Why do you keep bringing up the issue that you and AHF have as if anything I or anyone else here is saying contradicts that? None of us are advocating signing guys who will clog up the salary cap.

Then who are these vets that you keep suggesting are filling up the roster? Will they all be vet min guys because if so, how does that help your argument that this is a guaranteed playoff team? The Mayo's, Evan's, Jefferson's, Bynum's aren't coming cheap and you will have to sink considerable money into Pek to get Minnesota to blink on signing him. Are any of these stars? Does the roster already have stars?

You are not going to get a good coach to come in and be okay with tanking his 1st season. It's not gonna happen and that's got nothing to do with padding a resume.

So......no good coach has ever taken over and coached up a rebuilding project? They all just stumble onto winning programs? Makes me wonder what exactly it is they are "coaching".

[Admin]

A max starting salary for him would be 13.7 mil. I can't figure out why exactly people think he's restricted to 12 million because he's a 2nd rounder though. I think it's a confusion over the Arenas Rule which addresses 2nd rounders with only 2 years in the league and thus no Bird rights but Pek has played 3 seasons so should qualify. I know Fanatic pulled a Nic Cage in National Treasure and stole the CBA but I'm sure I could pick his pocket.

13.7 would be even better as that gives Minnesota even more reason to pause. But yes I do believe it was someone who mentioned the Arenas rule and him being limited to 12 million. I hope that you are right though.

[Admin]

And I don't see that team as being better than this year's Bucks or Sixers team from a talent standpoint. We can agree to disagree but the only gamechanger in that list is Al and I don't think he alone with a worse supporting cast can add that many wins.

Then who are these vets that you keep suggesting are filling up the roster? Will they all be vet min guys because if so, how does that help your argument that this is a guaranteed playoff team? The Mayo's, Evan's, Jefferson's, Bynum's aren't coming cheap and you will have to sink considerable money into Pek to get Minnesota to blink on signing him. Are any of these stars? Does the roster already have stars?

So......no good coach has ever taken over and coached up a rebuilding project? They all just stumble onto winning programs? Makes me wonder what exactly it is they are "coaching".

They might not be better than the Bucks or Sixers of this year but I doubt they'd be any worse and even if they are they're certainly not so much worse that they'd be able to tank for a top 3 pick.

Why is it so difficult to believe that we'll be able to fill the roster with 1 year contracts with guys who aren't bottom of the barrel players? We'll have plenty of money to spend and there won't be a shortage of guys who don't find longterm deals who will happily take more minutes and more money from Atlanta than they would from other teams who can't offer the same. I'm not going to go through the list and give you names as I know you're smart to know that there are plenty of guys.

In my mind there are a handful of guys whom I'd throw big money at. Dwight, CP3, Pekovic and possibly Bynum if his knees check out ok. Outside of that I'm not throwing max contracts at guys like Jefferson and I'm not giving big money long term deals to Mayo or Evans unless I've already locked up Dwight and I'm trying to fill out the roster and then I'm going to look at giving those guys reasonable deals.

No good coach is going to come to a team who is purposely going to tank. And asking him to tank is a FAR cry from a team undergoing a rebuilding project. We are a team with an All-Star on the roster, a 6th man of the year winner and a PG who is trending up and could be an All-Star at some point in the near future. That is not a rebuilding project and you don't ask a new coach with name recognition to come in and tank with that roster.

[Ruckus]

We are not tanking. If we were then we would have this season.

[thecampster]

There's only 1 guy in that starting lineup that can score from anywhere on the floor and opposing defenses would pack the paint and not allow us to score easily as we couldn't space the floor properly. Having Horford instead of Josh plus a quality scoring and defensive minded SF would be light years better than that lineup. I'm pretty sure we could trade Josh straight up in a SnT for Rondo if both teams were interested and if Josh was interested.

That's my whole point. In the case of Boston...you can't sign n trade Josh because Boston is currently 4 million into the LT (76 +Million in committed salaries).

I know I'm a Josh fan but that isn't clouding my judgment here. I'm saying you will have a much harder time getting back value for Josh right now because A. The trading destination has to be a place he wants to go, B. They have to want him and C. They need to be in the middle part of the salary structure....Can't be in the LT and not so low they can just sign Josh outright without giving up assets. So you're down to only about 10 teams that could do a deal for Josh out of which only a few would be on Josh's list.

In the same breath, Horford has no choice in the matter. Horford is on a very reasonable contract based on his production. Horford's reputation is stellar as a team player, example, etc. We have 3 PF's right now. One is young but talented and can only play the PF defensively. One is talented, signed and can effectively play the C as well. One is able to play the SF/PF equally well.

Remove Josh and you have C - Horford, PF - Scott or Dwight/Horford Scott bench and you need a SF.

Remove Horford and you have C - Dwight, PF - Scott, Josh SF.

In the Horford scenario Scott is a bench player, an underused commodity and you still need a SF.

In the Josh scenario you can use Scott at the PF.

Look at it like this. Assuming Josh gets the 14 mil I've been suggesting. On paper Horford at 12 mil is a bargain next to Josh.

But the reality is 2 positions. Horf/SF or Scott/Smith. The SF in question will be a free agent acquisition or draft pick. The SF position is weak. The going rate of 5-9 million for an average starting SF. So Scott Smith at 15mil total > Horf/random at 17-21mil.

Again...if you want to upgrade Teague or the SG...one of these 2 will have to go. The question is who would you rather play SF, Smith or an overpriced scrub. That's the weakness on the roster right now...who will play the 3 if Smith leaves.

[Peoriabird]

Josh Smith has to go before this team gets better period. It is hilarious to me that some think that the team would get worse if we signed Al Jefferson to the $14 mil per year and would rather gut the team than invest in him but is o.k. with investing in one of the worst offensive bone heads in the league whose athleticism is clearly on the decline. A guy that clearly doesn't want to be here an is simply uncoachable! on top of that wants to trade the team's best player for a worse player coming off of an ACL injury!!! WTF????

[Buzzard]

Again...if you want to upgrade Teague or the SG...one of these 2 will have to go. The question is who would you rather play SF, Smith or an overpriced scrub. That's the weakness on the roster right now...who will play the 3 if Smith leaves.

One weak position makes for a very good NBA team. Most would argue Indy has two weak positions at PG and SG, Miami has two at PG and Center, OKC has two at SG and pencil in Perk. Spurs have two with Leonard and Splitter starting. The list goes on as far as any NBA team you can name. Just pick a team and they have at least two weak positions.

Edited May 16, 2013 by Buzzard