Since we're being cheap....

[Diesel]

Since we're being cheap, we should fill out our team with D-Leaguers. I don't see many to talk about but there are 2.

1. Curtis Stinson = PG.

2. Derrick Caracter = PF/C.

I figure both guys will be available by the end of SL. Caracter is good but I just don't think the Lakers have an offer for him.

[TomSelleck]

Cheap? Didn't the Hawks just sign the most expensive player in free agency?

[Diesel]

Cheap? Didn't the Hawks just sign the most expensive player in free agency?

Tom, we did. However, we have bought a very nice house on the big side of town and now we want to fill it with pre-fab, press-board furniture, salvation army couches, and bedding from the everything must go dollar store closeout sell so that we can call better homes and gardens over to take pictures.

[DrReality]

It may come dow to that. probably won't matter. they sit on the end of the bench while we play our starts max minutes?

[Vol4ever]

Tom, we did. However, we have bought a very nice house on the big side of town and now we want to fill it with pre-fab, press-board furniture, salvation army couches, and bedding from the everything must go dollar store closeout sell so that we can call better homes and gardens over to take pictures.

Spot on analogy Diesel!

[spotatl]

To me the analogy would be that by upgrading the interior you would put the loan into a different category where your payment would be a ton higher. You have a 3000 a month payment with normal stuff inside but if you want granite countertops then you would have a $3600 a month payment. I think then you would have to decide just how much you really wanted the granite countertops.

Paying Shaq the MLE would cost them 11 million dollars... I don't htink its unreasonable to not want to pay it.

Edited July 19, 2010 by spotatl

[Vol4ever]

To me the analogy would be that by upgrading the interior you would put the loan into a different category where your payment would be a ton higher. You have a 3000 a month payment with normal stuff inside but if you want granite countertops then you would have a $3600 a month payment. I think then you would have to decide just how much you really wanted the granite countertops.

Paying Shaq the MLE would cost them 11 million dollars... I don't htink its unreasonable to not want to pay it.

If your only thinking of dollars. This is a business (the Hawks) and you are competing in the business world, this is not personal household decision.

If your competitor (the Magic and D. Howard), is wearing you out you have to make a move (Shaq) that will give you more market share or you will lose huge sales to your competition.

It's quite simple.

[spotatl]

dolfan- I guess the difference is that you see shaq as a major difference maker. I see shaq as someone who is mostly a sideshow and doesn't do anything at all to change the balance of power within the division. TO pay the luxury tax I think the ASG would need a move to make them think they could be a threat to finish higher than third place in the division.

Edited July 19, 2010 by spotatl

[drzachary]

Paying Shaq the MLE would cost them 11 million dollars... I don't htink its unreasonable to not want to pay it.

From a fan perspective, it's incredibly unreasonable.

I could not possibly care less how much money the ASG makes/loses in the interim (though I'll swear off corndogs for a year if they sell the Hawks for a loss). The ASG balance sheet in no way affects my happiness. What I want the ASG to do is to put a team on the floor that can win games when it counts. If they go bankrupt in the process, it doesn't faze me in the slightest.

Who cares about Fatcat McGee paying the luxury tax? He can just go to the bank and pull out another bag of money (with the dollar-bill sign on it) or sell one of his thousands of yachts. The idea of worrying about these clowns' wallets is ridiculous to me.

[clicklandshopping]

Spot on analogy Diesel!

LOL!!!! I thought that was pretty funny and can tell you are a very intelligent person. Now I work at a place where I come in contact with really rich people. People who own NFL teams, MLB Teams, and basically CEO's of many of our Fortune 500 companies. I talk to them on a daily basis and was surprised that they do actually go to yard sales ( they call them Estate sales......He he) buy used cars, stay in the same houses they had before getting rich, and doing anything they can to save money but buy quality at the same time. In other words they are "Cheap". And one thing that I've learn from billionaires are if they want something, they set a price a will not pay more then that because they always want to make good on their investment. Now maybe the ASG have set the wrong price, but I'm sure they use the same principles all Investors do. So if you go into a rich person's house, don't assume everything of quality was payed for with alot of quanity.

[spotatl]

drzachary- If you don't like worrying about financial considerations I suggest you start following leagues with no salary cap and just find the most popular team as they can afford to spend more than everyone else. I like it that the NBA makes it more difficult to just keep spending and spending to improve the team. If the NBA didn't have the luxury tax then I think the Hawks would have no chance at all to ever win a championship.

I mean its not your money so you might as well wish for a 200 million dollar payroll and for the ASG to pay an extra 130 million of luxury tax money. I just don't see the point of it so I'll only criticize the owners if they are passing up something that makes a real difference for the chances of the team.

Edited July 19, 2010 by spotatl

[drzachary]

drzachary- If you don't like worrying about financial considerations I suggest you start following leagues with no salary cap and just find the most popular team as they can afford to spend more than everyone else. I like it that the NBA makes it more difficult to just keep spending and spending to improve the team. If the NBA didn't have the luxury tax then I think the Hawks would have no chance at all to ever win a championship.

What? What you've said makes no sense at all. I don't care if they spend $1 or $1,000,000,000. Their job, as far as I'm concerned, is to take the Hawks to infinity and beyond. I don't care how they do as a business at all.

[lethalweapon3]

Rod Benson

~lw3

[Peoriabird]

What? What you've said makes no sense at all. I don't care if they spend $1 or $1,000,000,000. Their job, as far as I'm concerned, is to take the Hawks to infinity and beyond. I don't care how they do as a business at all.

Now if your wife or girlfriend made the same statement to you I bet you would consider her a little high in the maintenance area! :tongue:

Edited July 19, 2010 by Peoriabird

[Admin]

dolfan- I guess the difference is that you see shaq as a major difference maker. I see shaq as someone who is mostly a sideshow and doesn't do anything at all to change the balance of power within the division. TO pay the luxury tax I think the ASG would need a move to make them think they could be a threat to finish higher than third place in the division.

Huh? I haven't even posted in this thread ... but I'll be happy to say that I do not see him as a major difference maker. I see him as a guy that can and will bring more of the less hardcore fans to the games and I see him as someone that is still very difficult to defend in the paint, but certainly not a major difference maker by any means.

[spotatl]

Ha- sorry dolfan. Don't know how I managed to put your name there instead of Vol4ever.

[Sevin]

drzachary- If you don't like worrying about financial considerations I suggest you start following leagues with no salary cap and just find the most popular team as they can afford to spend more than everyone else. I like it that the NBA makes it more difficult to just keep spending and spending to improve the team. If the NBA didn't have the luxury tax then I think the Hawks would have no chance at all to ever win a championship.

I mean its not your money so you might as well wish for a 200 million dollar payroll and for the ASG to pay an extra 130 million of luxury tax money. I just don't see the point of it so I'll only criticize the owners if they are passing up something that makes a real difference for the chances of the team.

Shortly after the team resigned Joe, I got an email from my season ticket rep., who wanted me to upgrade to floor seats directly behind the visiting team's bench. For me, that would be more than a 100% increase in my investment in the team. Should I not expect the same?

[spotatl]

Should I not expect the same?

Of course you shouldn't expect the same. THe Hawks aren't doubling ticket prices across the board that I know of. If the Hawks were putting an across the board 20% increase in ticket prices and lowering payroll then I'd think you would have reason to complain. But just because they have tickets that cost more than you would like to spend in my mind doesn't mean you should expect the team to pay the luxury tax.

[drzachary]

Of course you shouldn't expect the same. THe Hawks aren't doubling ticket prices across the board that I know of. If the Hawks were putting an across the board 20% increase in ticket prices and lowering payroll then I'd think you would have reason to complain. But just because they have tickets that cost more than you would like to spend in my mind doesn't mean you should expect the team to pay the luxury tax.

We ranked 20th in payroll last year. Are we going to be in the bottom of the spenders when it comes to playoff contenders again? The Magic, Lakers, etc passed the luxury tax threshold, right?

Build the product and then sell it to the fans, ASG.

[niremetal]

We ranked 20th in payroll last year. Are we going to be in the bottom of the spenders when it comes to playoff contenders again?

Payroll follows attendance and revenues, not vice versa. It's all well and good that you view the owners' job as simply spending whatever it takes to win. But the Hawks are a business, not a charity for the benefit of its fans. Expecting them to spend money when the ticket sales and TV ratings (--> TV contracts) don't support it is unrealistic.