This must be the new plan....

[ATLBob]

13 is the minimum roster size.

Yep, my bad.

My apologies to inactive players everywhere.

[Buzzard]

They have already said they will pay the luxury tax to add quality players and improve our roster. How much better quality/good contract ratio are you going to get than Chillz on the deal he just signed? It seems to me that using our RFA rights and matching would not have been a bad outcome if our ownership is truly willing to pay the tax.

Assuming, however, that we would not have matched the deal, then we probably were in a position where getting this is better than nothing.

Evans only got 16 minutes a game as our backup small forward. I don't see much quality value in signing Chilz for 37 million when our rotation is Evans or JJ ( Craw at SG with JJ and Bibby or Teague in play ) to SF when Marvin is on the bench. We just need to spend our mle on a center.

I did not like the sale of the pick but this is different. Everyone knows what Chilz brings and 37 million is a lot more for a 2nd team role player than a unguaranteed rookie contract. Would I like to see Chilz back? Sure, just as I would like to have gotten more for him. But this move I can understand.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Buzzard

[ryandauwalker]

Evans only got 16 minutes a game as our backup small forward. I don't see much quality value in signing Chilz for 37 million when our rotation is Evans or JJ ( Craw at SG with JJ and Bibby or Teague in play ) to SF when Marvin is on the bench. We just need to spend our mle on a center.

I did not like the sale of the pick but this is different. Everyone knows what Chilz brings and 37 million is a lot more for a 2nd team role player than a unguaranteed rookie contract. Would I like to see Chilz back? Sure, just as I would like to have gotten more for him. But this move I can understand.

Buzzard, I agree with you. This move makes sense assuming Marvin is our SF and assuming he won't be traded away, unless we need a starting SF in the process (very unlikely).

I believe these assumptions are what are more upsetting to us Hawks fans (myself included) than the move itself. This means that Marvin will more than likely be our starting SF, and Childress has 0% chance of taking over that role. I think Chillz could have done well in this offense.

If Marvin is getting the majority of the SF minutes, this move is very logical considering our cap position and our lack of minutes to offer Childress. Might as well get SOMETHING for him.

That being said, I'm pissed. I really want us to get a capable 3..

[mrhonline]

No point in factoring in the roster charges for a team over the cap. Better way to look at it is that the Hawks have $5.3M left to spend on no fewer than three players.

Luxury tax looks unavoidable next year unless they plan to let Jamal go or trade Marvin.

[spotatl]

In my opinion its misleading to say that the Hawks have 5.3 M before they exceed the cap because then it makes it makes people think the hawks could have matched a Childress contract starting at 5.2 million without paying the tax which isn't at all true. For people who get the nuaces of the tax then its fine but describing it your way is of course perfectly correct but I think will just give most people a misleading idea of the Hawks options.

Another example would be to make this a 3 way trade with Sessions 3.9 million dollar salary coming to the Hawks and a TPE going to the Wolves. But that also would put the Hawks over the luxury tax to absorb his contract like that which complicates the trade a great deal.

Edited July 12, 2010 by spotatl

[mrhonline]

We won't know for a few days, but based on Coro's report, it sounds like Childress' deal will start at around $6.5M (flat?), so it would've been "tax or bust" either way.

[Joker]

By the numbers I have the Hawks are currently 3.5 below the Luxury Tax

$16,324,500 Joe

$11,700,000 Josh

$10,080,000 Jamal

$6,712,500 Marvin

$5,564,767 Bibby

$5,444,857 Horford

$4,251,250 Zaza

$2,500,000 Evans

$1,476,840 Teague

$1,042,320 Crawford

$854,389 (minimum for 11th roster spot)

$854,389 (minimum for 12th roster spot)

---------------------

$66,805,812 Total

The Luxury tax line is $70,307,000

So to sign the 13th member of the roster the Hawks could spend up to $3,501,188 without exceeding the luxury tax. I'm sure that my numbers aren't perfect but that gives you a pretty good idea where the Hawks sit. If the Hawks were going to have 14 players on the roster that would eat into the 3.5 million even further.

Do not forget the 3 million cash from OKC. In reality we have 63,805,812 in Total.

[AHF]

Do not forget the 3 million cash from OKC. In reality we have 63,805,812 in Total.

No - the $3M in cash does nothing to impact cap space. We are in the same position for cap room that we would have been in had we received $1 from OKC.

[Joker]

Luxury tax looks unavoidable next year unless they plan to let Jamal go or trade Marvin.

Yep, that why I though a trade was in the works. What's the point of signing Joe if we can't draw and aren't a championship team w/ him. There has to be a trade in the works or completed or else this Joe signing was really really bad.

[MaceCase]

Do not forget the 3 million cash from OKC. In reality we have 63,805,812 in Total.

In cap? No. I'm sure the ASG would have the monetary capabilities to cover 3 mil plus in salary or lux tax if pressed without the infusion from another team. That money has no bearance on our cap capabilities.

[Joker]

No - the $3M in cash does nothing to impact cap space. We are in the same position for cap room that we would have been in had we received $1 from OKC.

Thanks ATF and Crawesome.

[Buzzard]

Yep, that why I though a trade was in the works. What's the point of signing Joe if we can't draw and aren't a championship team w/ him. There has to be a trade in the works or completed or else this Joe signing was really really bad.

There may not be a trade in the works until the deadline. We sign one more decent player, a big, then see how the team jells; with Teague hopefully at the reigns and a rookie SG coming off the bench. Nothing has to be done until we know how things jell. Woody killed us by playing for the 3rd seed and not using Teague more. We need a big. Then, unless someone just drops a bomb of a deal on us, we play till we know what is needed and can be had.

The longer we wait, and closer to the trade deadline we get, the more valuable Craws 10 million and Evans 4 million expiring gets. That is a lot of money coming off the books for the right team.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Buzzard

[Dejay]

which could be the case this time. We Hawks fans see Chillz is this amazing assets but I wonder if other NBA GMs feel the same.

I didn't. I wanted Iguodala or Deng with that draft pick. I didn't like Childress's game when he at Stanford and my opinion didn't change once he got here. Oh well....

[Swatguy]

Sund has to have big plans. Perhaps sending Marvin to GS with Mo for Biendrins.

Sign Matt Barnes

Send Jamal to Minny for Al Jefferson.

Send Bibby and the TE to Cleveland for Mo.

Fill the roster with Sy and Sergiy and Aminu. Use that 3mil to buy out the euro contracts. Yeah, that must be what Sund will do.

[AHF]

Sund has to have big plans. Perhaps sending Marvin to GS with Mo for Biendrins.

Sign Matt Barnes

Send Jamal to Minny for Al Jefferson.

Send Bibby and the TE to Cleveland for Mo.

Fill the roster with Sy and Sergiy and Aminu. Use that 3mil to buy out the euro contracts. Yeah, that must be what Sund will do.

Without going into the likelihood of these moves or that apparent sarcasm in the post, let me note that the TPE cannot be combined with other players ala the Bibby/Mo deal proposed above. It can only be used on its own. Another poster did suggest trading it for McGee from Washington, though.

[Swatguy]

Without going into the likelihood of these moves or that apparent sarcasm in the post, let me note that the TPE cannot be combined with other players ala the Bibby/Mo deal proposed above. It can only be used on its own. Another poster did suggest trading it for McGee from Washington, though.

What sarcasm?

[Chinky_eyed_hawk]

Without going into the likelihood of these moves or that apparent sarcasm in the post, let me note that the TPE cannot be combined with other players ala the Bibby/Mo deal proposed above. It can only be used on its own. Another poster did suggest trading it for McGee from Washington, though.

So AHF... I do pretty good with all the cap space and most of the legalities with trade scenerios etc... but TPE are something I dont know quite as well. Let me as you this... How can Phoenix split the trade exception for the chill scenerio? Is that just how it works? So if there was a scenerio where we wanted to use this for a minimal contract, could we split it between two players?

[spotatl]

Thats just how it works. Trade exceptions aren't really traded- they are created when you take back less salary than they trade and later can be used to absorb salaries of other players. So if you have a big 14 million dollar TPE and use it to absorb a 3 million dollar player- you still would have 11 million dollars left over to absorb another player with it.

The Hawks will have a 3.7 million dollar TPE after this- if they used it to absorb a 2 million dollar player then they would have 1.7 million left over to absorb another player. But remember that the TPE cannot be used to acquire a player that makes more than the value of the TPE. But this in effect means that low value TPE's don't have much use.

[Chinky_eyed_hawk]

Thats just how it works. Trade exceptions aren't really traded- they are created when you take back less salary than they trade and later can be used to absorb salaries of other players. So if you have a big 14 million dollar TPE and use it to absorb a 3 million dollar player- you still would have 11 million dollars left over to absorb another player with it.

The Hawks will have a 3.7 million dollar TPE after this- if they used it to absorb a 2 million dollar player then they would have 1.7 million left over to absorb another player. But remember that the TPE cannot be used to acquire a player that makes more than the value of the TPE. But this in effect means that low value TPE's don't have much use.

Thanks. I didnt want to have to read through x # of posts/threads on every subject besides the one I really needed info on

[Diesel]

Thats just how it works. Trade exceptions aren't really traded- they are created when you take back less salary than they trade and later can be used to absorb salaries of other players. So if you have a big 14 million dollar TPE and use it to absorb a 3 million dollar player- you still would have 11 million dollars left over to absorb another player with it.

The Hawks will have a 3.7 million dollar TPE after this- if they used it to absorb a 2 million dollar player then they would have 1.7 million left over to absorb another player. But remember that the TPE cannot be used to acquire a player that makes more than the value of the TPE. But this in effect means that low value TPE's don't have much use.

I got all that.

However, what is the logic in not allowing a TPE to be used in combination with another player in trade?

Marvins 7 + 3.7 TPE = 10.7.

If it's just a created hole, shouldn't that hole be able to be applied in any manner that salary would be applied?