AJC: Hawks To Offer Full Max To Joe Johnson

[mrhonline]

Sund is in an awkward spot with JJ.

He is, but I suspect he had opportunities to make that decision easier. They tried to straddle the fence over the past few years by being competitive, yet financially conservative. The lack of a real strategy is what's haunting the Hawks now.

[exodus]

He is, but I suspect he had opportunities to make that decision easier. They tried to straddle the fence over the past few years by being competitive, yet financially conservative. The lack of a real strategy is what's haunting the Hawks now.

You don't want to get me started going down that path lol. You already know how i feel about the past management decisions.

Sund came in and did a good job maintaining the status quo, making some nice moves here and there (trading for Jamal and signing Flip for $1.5 million) but he couldn't compensate for all the mistakes made before he took the job.

[Joker]

If we get CP3, I am overjoyed Joe is back. If we get Melo, I am happy Joe is back. We make no moves, why the f**k is Joe back?

[BrazilianHawk]

That has to be the case or this is the dumbest thing the Hawks have done since passing on Chris Paul.

I'm not sure I'm interested in following this team if you're wrong.

Well I'm a Hawks fan for life, so I'll support them no matter what. But I really wish Sund would find a way to move Smoove for a decent C. Hell, I would do it for Scola and some spare Houston pieces. Don't know the Rockets would do it tho. Marc Gasol maybe?

[Flight]

If JJ leaves $28 mill on the table then I worry about his mental health.

My thoughts exactly lol

[mrhonline]

You don't want to get me started going down that path lol. You already know how i feel about the past management decisions.

I was thinking about Nene earlier today. LOL.

[BudBall]

If we get CP3, I am overjoyed Joe is back. If we get Melo, I am happy Joe is back. We make no moves, why the f**k is Joe back?

+1

[tbhawksfan]

I don't think JJ wants to play on Smoove's team. Sekou said it was JJ and Horf, Smoove. I've claimed Smoove, Chil and MW didn't mesh with JJ for years. Blame Woody. Drew is gonna minimize iso JJ. Look for JJ getting the max; in a S&T. I think he's gone. Just don't see Smoove and JJ playing together. Smoove is 24 and on a nice contract. JJ is 29 and looking for 6 years at max. I keep Smoove.

[Joker]

I don't think JJ wants to play on Smoove's team. Sekou said it was JJ and Horf, Smoove. I've claimed Smoove, Chil and MW didn't mesh with JJ for years. Blame Woody. Drew is gonna minimize iso JJ. Look for JJ getting the max; in a S&T. I think he's gone. Just don't see Smoove and JJ playing together. Smoove is 24 and on a nice contract. JJ is 29 and looking for 6 years at max. I keep Smoove.

Horford, Marvin, and Childress do not like Smith either. If this was a choice, resigning Joe and trading Smith would win out among the team. I am not sure what Jamal Crawford thinks? Teague said this locker room had issues indirectly. He talked about how no one wanted to take him under their wings.

Edit: Zaza as well.

Edited June 30, 2010 by nbasuperstar40

[HawkItus]

Horford, Marvin, and Childress do not like Smith either. If this was a choice, resigning Joe and trading Smith would win out among the team. I am not sure what Jamal Crawford thinks? Teague said this locker room had issues indirectly. He talked about how no one wanted to take him under their wings.

Edit: Zaza as well.

where did Teague say this? I thought there was a big write up about Bibby mentoring Teague. Also 790 was talking this morning saying that Joe and Craw didn't get along as a well known fact behind the scenes. That everybody hates Smith. Horf doesn't like Joe or Smith. Honestly you begin to wonder if all this is true.

[coachx]

I don't agree, but don't want to spend the next 24 hours focusing on the past.

Here's what I do know - the Hawks WILL have to do one of the following if they give Joe this contract:

1. Fill out the rest of the roster with young players for the minimum.

2. Trade someone on the roster to stay under the tax.

3. Pay the tax.

Options #1 and #2 mean the Hawks will remain the decent, but not great team. Option #3 conflicts with the coaching hire and draft moves.

Why would they leak this info if it's untrue???

That is 100% reality.

The choice has to be #3.

If not, I will be questioning the JJ resigning too.

I am hoping this is a sign that they are serious about winning now and paying a little luxury tax will be accepted.

Edited June 30, 2010 by coachx

[Final_quest]

Wow, emotions are running high in this thread. This is the biggest decision the franchise has made since it signed JJ from Phoenix. I say giving him max money hand cuffs us to mediocrity for several years.

Any chance we would have an opportunity to cut JJ's salary when the new CBA hits? Last CBA they had the Allan Houston rule, and let teams buyout one bad contract.

[Joker]

where did Teague say this? I thought there was a big write up about Bibby mentoring Teague. Also 790 was talking this morning saying that Joe and Craw didn't get along as a well known fact behind the scenes. That everybody hates Smith. Horf doesn't like Joe or Smith. Honestly you begin to wonder if all this is true.

I heard it on 790 the zone (Teague) It was from yesterday show, I can't remember which one, probably the one before the Stews.

[Joker]

where did Teague say this? I thought there was a big write up about Bibby mentoring Teague. Also 790 was talking this morning saying that Joe and Craw didn't get along as a well known fact behind the scenes. That everybody hates Smith. Horf doesn't like Joe or Smith. Honestly you begin to wonder if all this is true.

I always heard that Joe and Horford was cool, not as cool as Zaza, Marvin, and Horford but cool nonetheless.

[exodus]

Wow, emotions are running high in this thread. This is the biggest decision the franchise has made since it signed JJ from Phoenix. I say giving him max money hand cuffs us to mediocrity for several years.

Any chance we would have an opportunity to cut JJ's salary when the new CBA hits? Last CBA they had the Allan Houston rule, and let teams buyout one bad contract.

And you could easily be right. That is why it is such a tough call.

But then the flip side is how do the Hawks become legit title contenders if they let him walk?

In the past i always had an offseason wish list. Draft this guy, try to sign so and so. Now I am totally in wait and see mode.

[Admin]

And you could easily be right. That is why it is such a tough call.

But then the flip side is how do the Hawks become legit title contenders if they let him walk?

In the past i always had an offseason wish list. Draft this guy, try to sign so and so. Now I am totally in wait and see mode.

The only thing you're hoping for is that Chillz ends up in Washington, right? :snowballfight:

[AHF]

I know this has become a favorite drum of yours to beat, but just can't see your logic. By any measure, this roster's prime years are staring Sund in the face.

Sund had two choices: Hope he could find that exceedingly rare sub-30 pick who immediately makes an impact on his team,

...or...

pick up $3 million cash with which he would be better able to pick up someone who HAS ACTUALLY MADE AN NBA ROSTER before, and quite likely will impact the team to some extent for 2010 and 2011.

Sorry. Given the choices, I won't diss him for choosing B. It's more reasonable than A given the circumstances.

Maybe someone retorts, "Well, they shouldn't need the $3 million."

Doesn't matter whether they should or shouldn't. If they need it, they need it. So go get it and improve the team with the extra wad of money.

Remember the premise for my last comment: That we only have 2-3M total to fill out the remaining slots on our roster. With JJ, JC, Al, Josh, JC, Bibby, Teague, Zaza, Marvin, and Mo, that leaves 2-3 slots to fill.

If we have a total of 2-3M of space left under the luxury tax it is impossible for us to do more than fill out the roster with minimum salary players and gives us barely more room than that if we are going to cheap out and only carry 12 players. Since minimum salary players in recent years for the Hawks have translated into negative productivity and since a minimum salary vet eats up more space than a 2nd round pick, I think a second round pick is better.

Minimum cap impact for veteran salary: $854K

Minimum cap impact for 2nd round pick: $474K

Desirable Vet: Guaranteed contract

Second Round Pick: May be non-guaranteed contract

Now consider that the Hawks have about zero opportunity to add a young veteran with a future due to the price and the proximity to the tax and the need to reup Horford for big dollars and the only way I see of getting a significant complimentary piece is to really pay out luxury tax or to hit with a second round pick. We had the most desirable second round pick in basketball. Since I see picks like that as essential to us developing role players like Kendrick Perkins (27th pick) or Big Baby (35th pick), I see selling off that pick as giving up the lifeblood of our team's future. Cheap impact players are our chance to move beyond the second round.

Is it realistic to grab those incredibly cheap impact players in free agency? I don't personally think it is.

Is it realistic to grab them in the second round? With a decent second round pick, it is a low but very significant chance that you have to take.

As I said with D, we will wait and see how the roster is filled out by the ASG and I will happily eat crow if they sign impact free agents or developmental free agents with a future (i.e., no more Lorenzen Wright, Joe Smith, Randolph Morris types).

[Admin]

Let me just say that I DO NOT think that JJ is worth the max for 6 years ... but since we don't know what (if any) S&T offers we've gotten he may be worth that to us since losing him for nothing would look really bad as far as their public image is concerned and more importantly it would leave us without the ability to replace him due to being over the cap. So assuming that there aren't any S&T offers out there that would improve the team, my opinion is that short term this is a good move and as long as JJ stays healthy and someone else on the team develops into a 2nd reliable scorer it might not be a bad move long term either.

Regarding the ownership I find it remarkable that some people would still have the audacity to call these owners cheap (assuming this report is true), although I'm not sure that some people understand what the word cheap means. The way I see it outside of not spending the MLE last year or all of it the year before they have done a very good job of keeping our core together with fair market contracts and are now going to be pushing into the luxury tax to keep our best player. If what I read earlier in the thread is true about us being around 3 million over the luxury tax then perhaps that's the reason why we sold the 31st pick and I can't say I blame them at all if that's the case. I'm also hoping that we might have one or more new minority owners lined up that can help with our cash shortage.

In terms of what our roster will look like going forward I think we can remain competitive but I think we've got to trade the player(s) on our team that are causing chemistry problems if we're going to have any shot at challenging the elite teams.

At the end of the day I think I can feel a lot better about us overpaying for JJ than I can just seeing him leave for nothing.

[AHF]

If what I read earlier in the thread is true about us being around 3 million over the luxury tax then perhaps that's the reason why we sold the 31st pick and I can't say I blame them at all if that's the case. I'm also hoping that we might have one or more new minority owners lined up that can help with our cash shortage.

Unless I read wrong, we will be under the luxury tax with 2-3M left to fill out the roster which means that we will have less room to sign FAs if we have a veteran in one of those slots instead of a second round pick (as per my post above). Also, it means the vets we will be signing will be of the ilk that you get when you are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

In making my current posts, I am assuming the ASG are not cheap and are willing to spend up to just below the tax and perhaps spend the tax in future years. In that case, I think it is penny-wise and pound foolish to sell such a good shot at adding a cheap talent with the upside to be a contributing player.

[Admin]

If we have a total of 2-3M of space left under the luxury tax it is impossible for us to do more than fill out the roster with minimum salary players and gives us barely more room than that if we are going to cheap out and only carry 12 players. Since minimum salary players in recent years for the Hawks have translated into negative productivity and since a minimum salary vet eats up more space than a 2nd round pick, I think a second round pick is better.

What makes you think that this won't be the year that we move into the luxury tax? I know that BK and Sund have both said in the past that they wouldn't ask the owners to pay the luxury tax unless they felt like the team could compete for a championship. Maybe with the move to re-sign JJ, bringing back Chillz for the QO or using him in a S&T to get help at another position, and possibly using the MLE they've decided that this is the year where they have to go all in.

And wow what a difference a week makes. Selling the 31st pick for $3 million in cash makes a lot more sense to me when we're talking about paying the luxury tax than it did when I thought we would lose JJ for nothing.