Why are we not going after Haywood/Camby?

[AtLaS]

It's ridiculous, both of their teams are in shambles and they are expiring. They would obviously trade them for a decent deal. They are good defensive bigs who are also very good rebounders and would help us immensely. We would instantly be able to compete with Cleveland and Orlando.

All we'd need to do is throw in some expirings and a future pick. I really hope Sund is trying to address this situation, Kurt Thomas or some other scrub just ain't gonna cut it.

[mrhonline]

All we'd need to do is throw in some expirings and a future pick.

[niremetal]

Yeah. We've got all of those big-money expiring contracts lying around. So simple.

[MaceCase]

Yeah. We've got all of those big-money expiring contracts lying around. So simple.

Surely Marvin and the rights to Cenk Akyol can get it done.

[Joker]

Trading Marvin for backup help is dumb. We do not need camby. Haywood would be nice as a backup. We could trade Zaza but his toughness is huge for our team in the playoffs. I think we should stick it out.

[frankthetank966]

I agree. Get Camby now. All they would want would be a 1st rounder and probably Zaza.

[Diesel]

Trading Marvin for backup help is dumb. We do not need camby. Haywood would be nice as a backup. We could trade Zaza but his toughness is huge for our team in the playoffs. I think we should stick it out.

We don't need Camby??

Come on Superstar. You say some s----- s--- sometimes but this is not your best effort. Camby is a good rebounder and shot blocker. Our defense does it's best when we rebound. When we rebound well, we win.

[AtLaS]

Yeah. We've got all of those big-money expiring contracts lying around. So simple.

We could definitely get a deal done. Both guys are expiring and their teams will get nothing for them in the offseason. The teams would definitely be looking for a future 1st, which we could give. Throw in Zaza if we have to. We have the ingredients, we just need to make something happen.

[Joker]

We don't need Camby??

Come on Superstar. You say some s----- s--- sometimes but this is not your best effort. Camby is a good rebounder and shot blocker. Our defense does it's best when we rebound. When we rebound well, we win.

No, Camby is not a man defender, he's better on the help side. I do not see how the helps us. He's a good rebounder, true but not enough to make the trade with a 1st in mind. Camby is better than Zaza, I agree but Zaza brings toughness and energy. Camby brings shot blocking and like you stated rebounding but I am not sold on trading a first as well as more since his cap hit is 10 mil and Zaza is only 4.5. We would have to trade to Evans and Smith as well. That's too many players who get minutes for a bench player. Not smart.

Diesel, I would be the last person to talk about saying crazy s***, you formed a habit of it.

Edited February 13, 2010 by nbasuperstar40

[MaceCase]

We could definitely get a deal done. Both guys are expiring and their teams will get nothing for them in the offseason. The teams would definitely be looking for a future 1st, which we could give. Throw in Zaza if we have to. We have the ingredients, we just need to make something happen.

The answer is rather simple for those who do not get it. An expiring contract is far more valuable for a team to keep unless they are getting actual value in return. It doest matter if a team has only 3 wins, watching a contract expire can help them better their team in the offseason far more than any longer term mediocre talent or mid 20s first round picks can.

In the case of the Clippers they are not messing around with their max salary slot next season so they are not taking either of Mo or Marvin's longer term salaries which would be needed to match Camby's 10 million.

In the case of the Wizards they are packaging their expiring with 2 long term contracts in order to recieve further cap relief.

It would be nice if people would begin to understand that the NBA is a business first and basketball league second before they make their proposals.

[terrellgroup]

Please go and get Camby, we need a power forward to backup Josh. When Josh goes out, team begin taking it to the goal. We need to maintain some sort of threat. Plus Camby can play center and does both well. Imagine Camby off the bench. WOW

Check out these combinations:

Smith

Horford

Smith

Camby

Horford

Camby

Camby

Horford

However you want it, you got to respect whose down low.

Please, we need Camby,BAD

[TheNorthCydeRises]

No, Camby is not a man defender, he's better on the help side. I do not see how the helps us. He's a good rebounder, true but not enough to make the trade with a 1st in mind. Camby is better than Zaza, I agree but Zaza brings toughness and energy. Camby brings shot blocking and like you stated rebounding but I am not sold on trading a first as well as more since his cap hit is 10 mil and Zaza is only 4.5. We would have to trade to Evans and Smith as well. That's too many players who get minutes for a bench player. Not smart.

Diesel, I would be the last person to talk about saying crazy s***, you formed a habit of it.

The Clippers wouldn't trade Camby for just a 1st and Zaza. They wouldn't want to pay Zaza another 10 mill over 2 years.

As for Camby on the Hawks, he would immensely help that 2nd unit, a unit who can't stop anybody on defense or rebound the basketball when needed. You put Camby with that group, and you at least add a guy who can limit 2nd chance possessions and possibly start fast breaks . . . which may help a guy like Teague get down in 2 on 1 . . 3 on 2 situations in which he can make the right decision with the ball.

But his most important asset is the fact that when that ball comes off the rim, he'll be able to get to it on most occasions. What he did to us a few weeks ago was absolutely incredible. The dude grabbed 20 rebounds ( 10 offensive ).

Trading for Camby under your scenario means that Woody would have to shorten his rotation. LOL . . fine with me. He's doing that already in games anyway.

G - Bibby

G - Johnson

F - Marvin

F - Smoove

C - Horford

6th - Crawford

7th - Camby

8th - Teague

9th - West

10th - Collins ( if needed )

On most nights, we'd only go mainly 7 deep, with Teague and West providing spot support. If you wanted to look at a possible minutes rotation, it would look somewhat like this:

C: Horford ( 24 ) - Camby - ( 24 )

PF: Smoove ( 36 ) - Horford ( 12 )

F: Marvin ( 30 ) - Johnson ( 18 )

G: Johnson ( 20 ) - Crawford ( 24 ) - West ( 4 )

PG: Bibby ( 30 ) - Crawford ( 10 ) - Teague ( 8 )

What Camby would allow Woody to do, is to take either Horford or Smoove ( preferably Horford ) out of the game earlier in the 1st quarter, so that one of those guys could come back in the 2nd quarter, and play with the 2nd unit.

If the commitment is made to play Camby 1/2 the game, you could take Horford out at the 6 min mark in the 1st, rest him the rest of the quarter, and play Smoove with Camby the rest of the quarter.

Then once the 2nd quarter starts, Camby stays in, and you bring Horford back in to play with him. At the 6 min mark, sub Camby out and insert Smoove back into the lineup.

Woody would probably want to go to the Bibby - Crawford - Johnson lineup a little earlier in games as well, so that Marvin could play with that 2nd unit as well.

So now, to start the 2nd quarter, we could roll with this lineup:

C - Camby

F - Horford

F - Marvin

G - Crawford

G - Teague

That's a whole hell of a lot better of a lineup to go with, than:

C - Zaza

F - Joe Smith

F - Marvin

G - Crawford

G - Teague

See. . . Camby as a big man, is almost comparable impact wise, as Crawford is as a guard. That's not saying that Camby is as good as Smoove and Horford, But with him in the lineup, you don't have a significant dropoff in talent . . and he's versatile enough to even get a little scoring out of him if need be.

And just like with Crawford, if you needed for Camby to play extended minutes, he has the ability to do that and be effective. This is kind of the reason why I wanted Camby on the team before Crawford. If we could have BOTH though . . . wow. You're talking about a very solid and strong core 7.

Personally, I would trade 2 first round picks for Camby + whomever else is needed to complete the deal. You trade those picks to keep wasting money on young, late 1st round guys who may or may not help you. Remember, these 1st round picks are going to be closer to high 2nd round picks, than lottery picks. You're looking at us picking around the 25 - 28 slot, with our record being like it is.

Camby is an expiring contract. If he's a success, you could possibly re-sign him to a deal far less than 10 million a year. Would he take a 1 yr - 5 mill deal next year, if we played tough in the playoffs? If he doesn't work out . . oh well. His number comes off the books.

The priority for the Hawks in the next 6 - 18 months, is to possibly re-sign Joe Johnson, Al Horford, and maybe even Jamal Crawford. That way, you keep our core 6 players together at least through the next 2 - 3 years. After that, you add journeyman bench players to fill out the roster. If gutting this horrible bench to bring in a "mercenary" like Camby will give us a better shot in the playoffs, then so be it.

Edited February 13, 2010 by northcyde

[Joker]

The Clippers wouldn't trade Camby for just a 1st and Zaza. They wouldn't want to pay Zaza another 10 mill over 2 years.

As for Camby on the Hawks, he would immensely help that 2nd unit, a unit who can't stop anybody on defense or rebound the basketball when needed. You put Camby with that group, and you at least add a guy who can limit 2nd chance possessions and possibly start fast breaks . . . which may help a guy like Teague get down in 2 on 1 . . 3 on 2 situations in which he can make the right decision with the ball.

But his most important asset is the fact that when that ball comes off the rim, he'll be able to get to it on most occasions. What he did to us a few weeks ago was absolutely incredible. The dude grabbed 20 rebounds ( 10 offensive ).

Trading for Camby under your scenario means that Woody would have to shorten his rotation. LOL . . fine with me. He's doing that already in games anyway.

G - Bibby

G - Johnson

F - Marvin

F - Smoove

C - Horford

6th - Crawford

7th - Camby

8th - Teague

9th - West

10th - Collins ( if needed )

On most nights, we'd only go mainly 7 deep, with Teague and West providing spot support. If you wanted to look at a possible minutes rotation, it would look somewhat like this:

C: Horford ( 24 ) - Camby - ( 24 )

PF: Smoove ( 36 ) - Horford ( 12 )

F: Marvin ( 30 ) - Johnson ( 18 )

G: Johnson ( 20 ) - Crawford ( 24 ) - West ( 4 )

PG: Bibby ( 30 ) - Crawford ( 10 ) - Teague ( 8 )

What Camby would allow Woody to do, is to take either Horford or Smoove ( preferably Horford ) out of the game earlier in the 1st quarter, so that one of those guys could come back in the 2nd quarter, and play with the 2nd unit.

If the commitment is made to play Camby 1/2 the game, you could take Horford out at the 6 min mark in the 1st, rest him the rest of the quarter, and play Smoove with Camby the rest of the quarter.

Then once the 2nd quarter starts, Camby stays in, and you bring Horford back in to play with him. At the 6 min mark, sub Camby out and insert Smoove back into the lineup.

Woody would probably want to go to the Bibby - Crawford - Johnson lineup a little earlier in games as well, so that Marvin could play with that 2nd unit as well.

So now, to start the 2nd quarter, we could roll with this lineup:

C - Camby

F - Horford

F - Marvin

G - Crawford

G - Teague

That's a whole hell of a lot better of a lineup to go with, than:

C - Zaza

F - Joe Smith

F - Marvin

G - Crawford

G - Teague

See. . . Camby as a big man, is almost comparable impact wise, as Crawford is as a guard. That's not saying that Camby is as good as Smoove and Horford, But with him in the lineup, you don't have a significant dropoff in talent . . and he's versatile enough to even get a little scoring out of him if need be.

And just like with Crawford, if you needed for Camby to play extended minutes, he has the ability to do that and be effective. This is kind of the reason why I wanted Camby on the team before Crawford. If we could have BOTH though . . . wow. You're talking about a very solid and strong core 7.

Personally, I would trade 2 first round picks for Camby + whomever else is needed to complete the deal. You trade those picks to keep wasting money on young, late 1st round guys who may or may not help you. Remember, these 1st round picks are going to be closer to high 2nd round picks, than lottery picks. You're looking at us picking around the 25 - 28 slot, with our record being like it is.

Camby is an expiring contract. If he's a success, you could possibly re-sign him to a deal far less than 10 million a year. Would he take a 1 yr - 5 mill deal next year, if we played tough in the playoffs? If he doesn't work out . . oh well. His number comes off the books.

The priority for the Hawks in the next 6 - 18 months, is to possibly re-sign Joe Johnson, Al Horford, and maybe even Jamal Crawford. That way, you keep our core 6 players together at least through the next 2 - 3 years. After that, you add journeyman bench players to fill out the roster. If gutting this horrible bench to bring in a "mercenary" like Camby will give us a better shot in the playoffs, then so be it.

I like your analysis and it makes sense as usual. But trading picks is not a good idea when you seen what late 1st picks can do for you in recent years. Blair, Budinger, Jonas from Det, Collison, and David Lee were all late 1st. I am far from being sold on that. I was at the LAC/ATL game last Wed. Camby played like usual and like every great rebounder v. ATL, he killed us on the glass. I am not sold on trading all of that, much less a draft pick. I like our depth. Zaza, Joe Smith, and Evans all come in handy in the playoffs. They are known for that around the league. Camby had one great playoff (99' NYK) and after that he's been poor in the postseason. It makes sense but just not my type of deal. Draft picks is what will kill the deal, trading a draft pick in a draft this year with a lot of guys who could be great in the late round. I like the late 1st round in this draft more than I did last year and I was high on last years as well.

I agree, we are better with Camby than with Zaza, Smith, and Evans during the regular season. I just believe that during the postseason, I would rather have those three in all than Camby. Great post.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

In the end though, like the others have said, we just don't have enough tradeable assets to probably pull this off. The Clips may not want to do anything anyway. They may look to hold onto Camby's bird rights, and re-sign him in the offseason.

[tremor]

I like Bibby but he's not 30 mins player anymore.

[Admin]

The Clippers wouldn't trade Camby for just a 1st and Zaza. They wouldn't want to pay Zaza another 10 mill over 2 years.

I don't think that you can state that with absolute certainty though. Zaza is a young borderline starting caliber center and when he gets decent minutes he's definitely among the better values out there at center. Who are the Clippers going to sign that would replace what Zaza would give them in production and in character for less than he's making?

Of course it would cost us more than Z though since he doesn't make enough money to take on Camby's contract which means we'd have to include 1 or more additional players. One such addition would be Evans and according to the NBA Trade Machine making a deal of Zaza/Evans for Camby would improve our win total by 7, which is pretty damn remarkable considering that is a fairly equal deal talent wise. Of course we'd have to throw in a future 1st but if we could find a backup SF out there somewhere to replace Evans and I could sign Camby to a 2 year extension I'd absolutely do this deal.

[spotatl]

I can state it with complete confidence- there is no chance in hell that the Clippers would take Zaza and a late first for Camby. Zaza is a bad contract- he is not starting quality. Out of the last 3 years (including this one) he has been awful in 2 of them. He is now salary baggage.

[Admin]

I can state it with complete confidence- there is no chance in hell that the Clippers would take Zaza and a late first for Camby. Zaza is a bad contract- he is not starting quality. Out of the last 3 years (including this one) he has been awful in 2 of them. He is now salary baggage.

Well that's easy to state when that deal isn't even possible, but if we added Evans to Zaza and the first they might consider it. Nobody knows what they plan on doing with Camby next year or what Camby is planning on doing and they definitely can't depend on Kaman to stay healthy. 10 million over the next 2 years is a deal for a young 7' who can easily give you 12/8 as a starter. Maybe you don't believe that he could go back to the player he was 3 years ago but I don't doubt that he can since I'm of the opinion that he doesn't play as hard when he's coming off the bench.

[Diesel]

No, Camby is not a man defender, he's better on the help side. I do not see how the helps us. He's a good rebounder, true but not enough to make the trade with a 1st in mind. Camby is better than Zaza, I agree but Zaza brings toughness and energy. Camby brings shot blocking and like you stated rebounding but I am not sold on trading a first as well as more since his cap hit is 10 mil and Zaza is only 4.5. We would have to trade to Evans and Smith as well. That's too many players who get minutes for a bench player. Not smart.

Diesel, I would be the last person to talk about saying crazy s***, you formed a habit of it.

I never said he was a man defender?? Never came close. I said he was a great rebounder and shot blocker...