Suns say they will match our offer to Johnson

[Admin]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?i...TC-DT9705204233

Who was it that was arguing that we couldnt offer $20 million in the first year of a deal to a player? I was pretty sure that we could and it appears that I was right.

LAS VEGAS -- Joe Johnson's camp was informed Saturday that the Phoenix Suns intend to match Atlanta's expected five-year, $70 million offer to the restricted free agent, according to NBA front-office sources.

Word began spreading Friday at the Vegas Summer League that the Hawks have given Johnson a firm commitment that they'll sign him to a maximum offer sheet on July 22, which the league office has scheduled to be the first day free agents can sign contracts.

The Hawks' offer, sources said, is likely to be front-loaded with a payment as high as $20 million in the first year of the deal. Rules on such payments and other specifics of the deal are also on hold until July 22, when the league announces the salary-cap number for next season.

The rules on contract lengths, however, have already been finalized, and the Hawks are prevented from signing Johnson to a contract longer than five years. A maximum offer from the Suns would span six years at an estimated $90 million, matching the terms Michael Redd received from Milwaukee earlier this week, but sources say Phoenix has offered Johnson closer to $60 million over six seasons.

The Suns have maintained all season that they will match any offer Johnson gets, rating the versatile swingman as no less critical to the team's success than its three All-Stars: Amare Stoudemire, Steve Nash and Shawn Marion. Matching a five-year offer, though, is undoubtedly more palatable than paying Johnson in the Redd range for six.

Various league executives have privately questioned whether the Suns would indeed match a max offer sheet to Johnson, given owner Robert Sarver's stated aversion to letting his annual payroll stray far beyond $50 million. With Johnson earning an average annual wage of $12 million and Stoudemire soon to receive a maximum contract extension that would kick in starting with the 2006-07 season, Phoenix would be in the rare position of carrying four players who earn roughly $50 million by themselves.

Arn Tellem, Johnson's agent, met with Phoenix president Bryan Colangelo and team chairman Jerry Colangelo during the Suns' summer-league game here Saturday against the Los Angeles Clippers. All parties declined to comment.

The Hawks, sources said, are still expected to go ahead with signing Johnson to an offer sheet, hoping that the value of the contract, potential incentive clauses and the up-front payment will prompt Phoenix to change its mind.

The Hawks will also take encouragement from the new collective bargaining agreement, which lessens the risk of signing restricted free agents. Starting this offseason, teams will be given only seven days to match an offer to a restricted free agent, compared to the previous window of 15 days. Teams have been hesitant in the past to sign restricted free agents to offer sheets and then have their free-agent funds potentially tied up for 15 days.

After a breakthrough 62-win season, followed by a trip to the Western Conference finals, Phoenix went into the offseason hoping to re-sign Johnson, sign Stoudemire to the extension and add toughness. The Suns addressed the latter aim by trading swingman Quentin Richardson to the New York Knicks for power forward Kurt Thomas and then reaching a verbal agreement on the first day of the free-agent season with Utah Jazz guard Raja Bell.

The Suns are forbidden from publicly discussing the Bell deal until he officially signs July 22, but team sources have said repeatedly that Bell was targeted to back up Johnson -- not as an insurance policy in case Johnson is let go.

[emorystar]

Could be a bluff to prevent Atlanta from offering him a contract

[jezmund]

This should make a lot of folks on here happy. I know a lot of you didn't want Joe Johnson, especially for that kind of money.

[Admin]

after trading Q, can they really afford to lose him? I dont see how they can afford Nash, Marion, Amare, and Johnson all being on or close to max contracts.

This really sucks if they do match though because he was the lone premier FA left. I think if they do match we have to offer Dalembert the same or similar deal.

[mrhonline]

Interesting. You couldn't offer anything near that kind of deal under the old CBA. I can't wait for the rules to come out re: the agreed upon deal.

But my questions is this: If the Suns know for sure the Hawks are going to offer JJ the max, why haven't they changed their offer to him?

Methinks they're bluffing.

[KB21]

I saw someone on another board mention this. He says that Philadelphia and Chicago are probably praying right now that the Hawks and Suns don't agree to a sign and trade with Joe Johnson. If that happened, the Hawks will still have significant money to sign two players. The line up this guy proposed is what he called a Billy Knight wet dream:

PG - Joe Johnson

SG - Josh Smith

SF - Marvin Williams

PF - Tyson Chandler

C - Samuel Dalembert

That's very unlikely, but that is the type of long armed, athletic, and defensive line up that BK wants to field.

[buildafire]

Can I just ask....what in the **** are we going after Johnson for?

He's ANOTHER SG/SF.....you'd have to have Johnson and Childress at the two...with Smith and Williams at the three.

Which means one of those two will HAVE to be on the bench and that is ridiculous.

This team needs a PF, C and PG.....go after Curry and Dalembert....we can trade Harrington to get Curry and spend to get Dalembert.

Stoudemire, Smith, Williams, Curry and Dalembert starting...with Lue, Childress, Diaw and Collier off the bench.

I think that is the better bet for this team.

[KB21]

The Hawks are going after Joe Johnson to play the point guard position, which he is more than capable of doing.

[mrhonline]

Was I ever wrong. I did some research and the Hawks are allowed to offer up to like $27M in the first year of the deal.

The real craziness is that only $13M would count against the cap.

The deal is probably as follows:

Year 1: $13.04 (as much as $14.5M of remaining salary could be paid up-front)

Year 2: $13.84

Year 3: $14.63

Year 4: $15.43

Year 5: $16.23

The Hawks should offer this deal for Dalembert as well.

It would actually help the Hawks in the long-run because they would be paying less than what the cap shows...

[buildafire]

They are going after a guy that is 6ft 7 to play the point????

[buildafire]

Forgive me for not knowing, but has Johnson ever played point?

[KB21]

It could also work to our disadvantage in a sense, because Phoenix would also be paying less over the long term of the contract.

[KB21]

Yes.

Whenever Nash was out of the game last season, Johnson was playing the point. Johnson was also playing the point position the year before Nash got to Phoenix.

[buildafire]

I see, I see...I did not know that.

A guy that is 6-6, 6-7 just seems awful big for the point....but hey, if we can afford to do it I wouldn't mind that scenario while also signing Dalembert and trading for Chandler or Curry.

[Guest Walter]

Here's what would make me for it, almost regardless of the cost...

1) If JJ can play at least half his minutes competitively at Pg

2) If we don't trade value for him

3) & if we can still get a legitimate big man prospect

About #1, from KB's report it seems like he might want to play Pg and his ability to must be accurately determined. About #2, I consider Harrington to be "of value". About #3, a get the impression a severely frontloaded contract could limit our spending power this year. However, even if we spend near what we have available in cap space, we could trade say Harrington and Diaw, two players of some value, to say Philly for a resigned big man or perhaps still sign a more budget big like Gadzuric outright. I do think regardless it lessens our chance of a big and we NEED that a prospect at the C position badly.

I like the move for alot of reasons...

1) JJ if he could play Pg could make for an incredibly formidable lineup with size/skill mismatches in our favor (save C and maybe Pf) everywhere.

2) other FAs take notice

3) JJ is of the right age but more experience to mix with our youth movement

4) It shows BK can get it done in FAcy

5) It's talent, you can always do something with talent

W

[mrhonline]

Quote:

---

It could also work to our disadvantage in a sense, because Phoenix would also be paying less over the long term of the contract.

---

BTW, I think the first-year cap count has to still be under the max, so the following is probably more accurate:

Year 1: $12.5 (up to $25M up-front)

Year 2: $13.3

Year 3: $14.1

Year 4: $14.9

Year 5: $15.7

Total : $70.5M

As far as Phoenix, it really depends on whether they want to pay the luxury tax. They can probably avoid it this year, if they use the Allan Houston rule on Howard Eisley.

If they match and waive Eisley's contract, they're looking at $55M in cap for nine roster spots. That means they have to sign the rest of their roster with minimum contracts.

However, that's not the whole story. If the Hawks make them pay $20M up-front, plus they have to pay Eisley, they're actually going to have to payout some $75M in actual salaries this year.

Plus, they're definitely in luxury tax territory the next two seasons when Amare is extended. So even if they're actually paying less on JJ's contract, the luxury tax will basically negate that fact. They're looking at close to $60M for only *seven* players in 2006/7 and $69M for only *six players* in 2007/8.

If they match, they will either have no depth for the next three seasons or will have to trade someone to extend Amare.

I like it.

[buildafire]

I think paying that kind of money to Johnson is a little too much.....especially when the $20 million would have to be front loaded and would hinder us being able to spend on another player that we need.

I'd rather try my luck with Stoudemire and Lue, resign Delk.

Have Childress and Smith at the two, Williams and Diaw at the three....sign Dalembert at the center and trade for Chandler/Curry, or the like...at the 4 spot.

That would mean spending really only on Dalembert, leaving lots of money to use on yet another quality back up player.

We need depth, as well as a little more talent.

[mrhonline]

The $ paid to JJ up-front doesn't count vs. the cap IIRC, it's just more $ that has to come out of the owner's pockets sooner rather than later.

If the owners are willing to spend, which all reports seem to indicate, the Hawks could offer the exact same deal to Philly for Dalembert.

And still be a couple million under the cap if both came to Atlanta.

[Guest Walter]

says JJ played point 1% of the 48 minutes in a game. That's less than 30 seconds a game. This is your preffered stat site, KB so I'm assuming we should consider this accurate.

W

[Guest Walter]

Given they want to extend Amare now for next year, having a contract that would be less for next year because they pay more now might help them. I wouldn't consider this near a done deal yet.

W