Hawks take a step forward but leave questions behind

[DrReality]

He tells it like it is.

Hawks take a step forward but leave questions behind

By Jeff Schultz

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Seven months ago, you would have taken 47 wins.

Seven months ago, you would have taken a playoff series win and a second-round sweep by the possible eventual league champion because that’s more than any Hawks team had given you in 10 years (and it only seemed like 20 years).

In short, it’s OK to feel satisfied with what front offices like to refer to as “incremental progress.”

“It was a good season,” Josh Smith said Monday night. “I’m not going to let a sweep leave a bitter taste in my mouth like last year.”

But when the Hawks lost to Cleveland 84-74 at Philips Arena, they completed a strange postseason that created more questions than positive vibes.

The starting point guard? Mike Bibby was on the bench for most of the third quarter, not exactly positive foreshadowing going into negotiations as he becomes a free agent.

The team’s best player? Joe Johnson, who has one year left on his contract, had another miserable shooting night (7-for-18) and has played only two strong playoff games out of 18 in two years with the Hawks. Take out Game 4 against Boston last year and Game 7 against Miami this season and Johnson has shot only 38 percent from the floor and averaged 16 points.

At what point do you determine: “This is as good as he gets, and this is as good as we get with him”?

Marvin Williams is unsigned. Josh Smith is still a thrill ride. That’s four-fifths of the starting lineup. The only absolute solid and stable piece to keep and build around: Al Horford.

The Hawks won a seven-game series against Miami. But they still showed an ability to get blown out by an opponent almost as often as they did an ability to dominate one.

You want to feel good about this team. But can you?

The Hawks aren’t a great team. They’re a pretty good team at a crossroads, and they’ve never faced a more important offseason.

“I think we can compete against everybody in the league if we believe and we put our mind to it,” Johnson said. “But honestly, I don’t think we believed we could win this series. We came in hoping we could win, not believing.

“It’s going to be an interesting summer. Hopefully we can keep the pieces in place. But this is a business.”

This last game was a marginal step forward from the first three. For one, the defense improved. Secondly, Johnson —- whose lack of leadership has been an issue —- accepted some blame Monday.

“I probably had my worst playoffs ever, both the first and second rounds,” he said. “We got out of the first round, but I feel like I could’ve done more for my team.”

There’s a tendency when teams are down 3-0 in a playoff series to play hard at the outset but fizzle quickly when the opponent steps it up. Give the Hawks credit. The Cavaliers might have been off their game a little, but Atlanta had chances to fold up and didn’t.

The last year the Hawks had won a playoff series was 1999, and the good feelings that season also didn’t last long. They were swept by the New York Knicks in the second round. General manager Pete Babcock apparently was so distraught that he popped a spring and traded Steve Smith for Isaiah Rider. The rest is inglorious history.

The chances of general manager Rick Sund blowing things up this summer are slim. But it’s startling how much things are up in the air. That’s rare to see when you have such a young team that has shown incremental progress over a period of years.

The team’s next direction is anybody’s guess.

[Dakin]

"The only absolute solid and stable piece to keep and build around: Al Horford."

huh?Absolutely solid and stable? I haven't seen any reason to believe he'll ever average more than 12 ppg..

Edited May 12, 2009 by Dakin

[buckeye242424]

"The only absolute solid and stable piece to keep and build around: Al Horford."

huh?Absolutely solid and stable? I haven't seen any reason to believe he'll ever average more than 12 ppg..

I see Al being a 14/15 pt. scorer and 10 boards a game player. "Solid." He showed, as a second year player, the potential he has the last 10 games of the regular season. Add to that the intangibles of effort, heart, a solid role model and leader and he is "stable".

[bird_dirt]

The team’s best player? Joe Johnson, who has one year left on his contract, had another miserable shooting night (7-for-18) and has played only two strong playoff games out of 18 in two years with the Hawks. Take out Game 4 against Boston last year and Game 7 against Miami this season and Johnson has shot only 38 percent from the floor and averaged 16 points.

At what point do you determine: “This is as good as he gets, and this is as good as we get with him”?

wait til next year. if he's still in a hawks uniform, he will have his best playoff performance of his entire career--bet on it. how do i know? he'll be working for a big contract.

[coachx]

More from Schultz: http://blogs.ajc.com/jeff-schultz-blog/200...nson-not-smith/

Hawks should consider trading Johnson, not Smith

10:41 am May 12, 2009, by Jeff Schultz

Almost every player on the Hawks’ roster is either at the end of a contract, or near the end of a contract, or on somebody’s, “Let’s drop-kick this guy out of town,” list.

Josh Smith doesn’t have a contract issue. That tells you what category he fits in.

But if you really believe the Hawks need to shake things up this off-season and possibly trade one of their starters, don’t look at Josh Smith. Look at Joe Johnson.

People, this isn’t even close.

This week’s Countdown . . .

10: Ordinary Joe: 2-for-18 in playoffs

Joe Johnson is a three-time All-Star. I felt I needed to get that out there right away because it seems like any time somebody criticizes Joe Johnson, one of his defenders screams, “He’s a three-time All-Star!” But this is business and these are the facts: Joe has one year left on his contract. He just completed an awful post-season, during which he played one good game and 10 generally crummy ones. In last year’s playoffs, he went 1-for-7 against Boston. This is not what you want from a guy who’s supposed to be your best player, especially when the game’s matter most. It’s certainly not what you want from a player who should be your leader but seldom acts like one. Or acts like he wants to be one. Joe’s one of those quiet guys who just wants to do his thing, whatever his thing is. But that’s not good enough here.

9. Sund has some difficult decisions

General manager Rick Sund just completed his first season. I’m not suggesting that his first makeover would be a failure if he doesn’t trade Joe Johnson. But it’s something he should look at. Just tweaking this roster may not be enough to get this team to the next level. With Johnson turning 28, chances are we’ve seen the best he has to offer. His skill set would be valuable on the trade market to elite teams that are looking for a complimentary player to round out their roster. He potentially could fetch a lot in trade. It’s worth exploring. Here’s why:

8. Team’s core is smaller than you think

I hear a lot about the Hawks’ having a great core of players. Don’t know about that. But if that’s true, here’s how I would list the guys to build around: 1) Al Horford (absolute); 2) Josh Smith (probably); 3) Marvin Williams (maybe). Johnson is not a core piece. Chances are, he’s out the door next year. Mike Bibby might be gone already. Yes, Smith is maddening. But he remains by far the most talented player on the roster with the most upside. The Hawks’ greatest nightmare would be dealing him and then seeing him turn into a human wrecking machine with another team and under another coach. He scored 26 points in Game 4 against Cleveland. He certainly outplayed and outscored Johnson in these playoffs. You don’t trade Josh Smith. He’s a difference maker. Even if sometimes the difference is for the other team.

[mrhonline]

"The only absolute solid and stable piece to keep and build around: Al Horford."

I think it's Schultz who loves Horford's "intangibles."

[exodus]

I think it's Schultz who loves Horford's "intangibles."

Like being afraid to look at the basket when he has the ball unguarded at the foul line? Or not even trying to drive by guys he could outsprint running backwards? Is that what you mean by intangibles?

Personally i would prefer points. The only reason he gets as many points as he does is because teams ignore him while focusing on other guys.

Edited May 12, 2009 by exodus

[Antmillennium]

Schultz is spot-on about Joe Johnson. I'd trade Joe Johnson way before I trade Josh Smith.

[Diesel]

Al Horford needs to spend the whole summer in a big man camp learning pick and roll and pick and pop. IF he paid me, I would teach him. There is no way that Bibby and Al can't be the start of our two man game on a 2nd option.

[coachx]

Schultz is spot-on about Joe Johnson. I'd trade Joe Johnson way before I trade Josh Smith.

He does not mention how much more compicated and RISKY it would be to trade JJ, in the last year of his deal, when compared to a Smoove trade. Teams would want one of 1 of 2 things in order to trade for JJ:

1. They would require JJ sign an extension with them in order to complete the deal. JJ may have no interest in signing an extension with the team,that happens to offer the best deal for the Hawks. Just b/c its best deal for the Hawks does not make it a place JJ wants to sign a 4 or 5 year extension with.

2. If the team wants JJ's expiring contract so they can save money next year they would be looking to dump longer and less desirable contracts on us.

If it become public knowlege we are shopping JJ we may back ourselves into a corner where we tick JJ off and he publically states he does not want to sign an extension. Then we are stuck with teams knowing we have to trade JJ or we lose him for nothing as a UFA.

We could be playing with fire if shopping JJ becomes public or gets back to JJ. I know its a business but you don't want to tick off a guy you only have under contract for one season and do not hold RFA rights too. JJ would control the situation more then Hawks in that scenerio.

Edited May 12, 2009 by coachx

[mrhonline]

Like being afraid to look at the basket when he has the ball unguarded at the foul line? Or not even trying to drive by guys he could outsprint running backwards? Is that what you mean by intangibles?

Personally i would prefer points. The only reason he gets as many points as he does is because teams ignore him while focusing on other guys.

Don't ask me, I didn't say it. :)

[Plainview1981]

Trading Joe would be good. As said, he will be 28 next season and his production and play has tailed off for 2 seasons in a row. Give me a good reason why that trend isn't going to continue? He was supposed to play better under a full year with Bibby and that didn't happen. He's not playing any better with Bibby than he did Anthony Johnson and Tyrone Lue. Even for the biggest JJ fan, I don't see how you can ignore JJ's continuing slip play over the last two seasons.

[falc82]

I'm not so sure trading Joe Johnson is the best option we have to improve this team.

If we trade Joe then does Josh Smith become our #1 option? Better question is does Josh Smith then think he is our #1 option? If you think you see him taking too many jumpers now just wait till next season if we trade Joe.

Trading Joe destroys our chemistry. We could get rid of a Marvin or a Bibby and still have the chemistry unharmed, but trading away the focal point of your team will undo that chemistry.

With that said lets assume we do shop Joe Johnson. What do you guys think we could and should get back for him? I don't really see an enticing package out there that really improves this team. Lets discuss what an appropriate return for Joe is.

[AtLaS]

He does not mention how much more compicated and RISKY it would be to trade JJ, in the last year of his deal, when compared to a Smoove trade. Teams would want one of 1 of 2 things in order to trade for JJ:

1. They would require JJ sign an extension with them in order to complete the deal. JJ may have no interest in signing an extension with the team,that happens to offer the best deal for the Hawks. Just b/c its best deal for the Hawks does not make it a place JJ wants to sign a 4 or 5 year extension with.

2. If the team wants JJ's expiring contract so they can save money next year they would be looking to dump longer and less desirable contracts on us.

If it become public knowlege we are shopping JJ we may back ourselves into a corner where we tick JJ off and he publically states he does not want to sign an extension. Then we are stuck with teams knowing we have to trade JJ or we lose him for nothing as a UFA.

We could be playing with fire if shopping JJ becomes public or gets back to JJ. I know its a business but you don't want to tick off a guy you only have under contract for one season and do not hold RFA rights too. JJ would control the situation more then Hawks in that scenerio.

I agree with the 2nd part of your post, we definitely don't want to advertise that we're shopping him if we were.

But, I disagree about teams requiring him to sign an extension. You can still get a good player/prospect for JJ's deal. Denver traded AI's expiring for Billups. The Lakers gave up trash for Gasol. The fact is that most good players who are on bad teams with big contracts, their team is usually going nowhere and would prefer an expiring deal, and maybe a pick or young player as well, which we could give. This is why star players VERY often get traded for garbage and a pick or two.

[AtLaS]

Like being afraid to look at the basket when he has the ball unguarded at the foul line? Or not even trying to drive by guys he could outsprint running backwards? Is that what you mean by intangibles?

Personally i would prefer points. The only reason he gets as many points as he does is because teams ignore him while focusing on other guys.

The problem is that he needs a coach to tell him to take those shots, and make those moves. Right now he doesn't have that. If a player is looking for the shot, it gives a lot more confidence than if you're unsure of whether to take it or not.

The fact is that he has no coaching whatsoever. My coaches would yank me out of the game and start yelling if I passed up an open shot. The same should be done for Horford because he has a nice midrange shot.

[DrReality]

Allstars make their teammates better and that is seldom the case with JJ. A new location would do him good . . . . and us.

[falc82]

Allstars make their teammates better and that is seldom the case with JJ. A new location would do him good . . . . and us.

Fair enough. But for what and who?

[PureGreatness]

Trading Joe would be good. As said, he will be 28 next season and his production and play has tailed off for 2 seasons in a row. Give me a good reason why that trend isn't going to continue? He was supposed to play better under a full year with Bibby and that didn't happen. He's not playing any better with Bibby than he did Anthony Johnson and Tyrone Lue. Even for the biggest JJ fan, I don't see how you can ignore JJ's continuing slip play over the last two seasons.

co sign

[tomac]

I say we keep Joe and Josh and sign a true # 1 in 2010. Bibby's contract will free up 9-10 million/yr even if he's resigned. Speedy's contract is expiring. That's another 6 mil per. Trade the rights to Chills for cash considerations. You could clear 20 mill per to sign a "Dwayne Wade" to put next to Joe. If we could draft a PG and sign a utilitarian center like Brendan Haywood, then we'd roll out a lineup including Joe, Josh, Dwayne, Haywood and whatever PG we draft. Sign Marvin for the MLE and let Mo Evans walk after 2010. Your bench now has Bibby, Marvin, Flip, and Al filling it out. This is realistic. Even if we had to pay a luxury tax, we wouldn't be that far over the cap.

[falc82]

I say we keep Joe and Josh and sign a true # 1 in 2010. Bibby's contract will free up 9-10 million/yr even if he's resigned. Speedy's contract is expiring. That's another 6 mil per. Trade the rights to Chills for cash considerations. You could clear 20 mill per to sign a "Dwayne Wade" to put next to Joe. If we could draft a PG and sign a utilitarian center like Brendan Haywood, then we'd roll out a lineup including Joe, Josh, Dwayne, Haywood and whatever PG we draft. Sign Marvin for the MLE and let Mo Evans walk after 2010. Your bench now has Bibby, Marvin, Flip, and Al filling it out. This is realistic. Even if we had to pay a luxury tax, we wouldn't be that far over the cap.

Morris also comes off the books in 10'