in defense of the ASG

[NineOhTheRino]

my hockey knowledge equals my knowledge nuclear physics but I thought this was interesting:

The NHL is rejecting Ilya Kovalchuk's 17-year' date=' $102 million contract with the New Jersey Devils because it circumvents the league's salary cap, a sources told ESPN.com's Scott Burnside.[/quote']

first of all, why on earth did Kovalchuk turn down a much better offer from ASG? Second, how can we call these guys cheap when they have shown that they'll spend money on players they've deemed valuable.

Edited July 21, 2010 by NineOhTheRino

[clicklandshopping]

my hockey knowledge equals my knowledge nuclear physics but I thought this was interesting:

first of all, why on earth did Kovalchuk turn down a much better offer from ASG? Second, how can we call these guys cheap when they have shown that they'll spend money on players they've deemed valuable.

I think the real problem is we think Atlanta deserves the Kobes, Lebrons ,or Wades of the world(Or at least Melo) and anything less will be critized unless we get a whole team of stars that no organization can afford. Now I do agree if they can get people in to really help us we should, but unfortunately no one is out there unless we give away a player deemed valuable to the ASG. Maybe this year the ASG will relook at who they think are core players and make changes. That is what I think fans want!

[Sothron]

my hockey knowledge equals my knowledge nuclear physics but I thought this was interesting:

first of all, why on earth did Kovalchuk turn down a much better offer from ASG? Second, how can we call these guys cheap when they have shown that they'll spend money on players they've deemed valuable.

Kovalchuk and his agent have never confirmed that was the last offer from the ASG. Kovalchuk also wanted the ASG to not just talk about building a championship team but actually spending the money to do it. They were (and are) completely unwilling to do it so he wanted to go somewhere to actually have a shot at winning. You absolutely can not blame him. The ASG have traded away or let walk every great player the Thrashers ever had. We have not once resigned a good player to the Thrashers. Not ONCE.

[NJHAWK]

I dont think the NHL will win the arbitration case because the precident for such deals has already been set. This is either Bettmans hate for the Devils or just him trying to set an example. I think what will happen is the contract will be allowed but a rule will be set in the future that such contracts wont be.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

After that Sund article that Jeff Schultz did today, I'll have to change my opinion of the ASG. If they're not willing to go over the luxury tax to possibly upgrade the team, then I can't give them the benefit of the doubt anymore. They may not be "cheap . . cheap", but they're not big league owners. The only way this team gets over the top ( as is ), is if JJ, Horford, and Smoove play like top 3 guys at their respective positions.

Our goal is to continue to put an elite caliber ballclub on the floor and stay within the model [owner] Bill Davidson had when the Pistons were winning championships and what San Antonio did with their spending and the way they stayed under the luxury tax.

- Rick Sund

The ASG might as well be BP, for all I'm concerned.

[Brokentree]

Our goal is to continue to put an elite caliber ballclub on the floor

See the problem is they already think the Hawks are elite.

[pimp]

See the problem is they already think the Hawks are elite.

It's sad but true.

The :real" elite team's goal is the win the championship.Our goal is to

remain a top 4 seed. :sad:

Edited July 21, 2010 by pimp

[NJHAWK]

The humiliating sting of the Orlando series has worn off for them. "Its all Woody's fault" . That was the cheap way out and they took it. Now we have Larry " new voice " Drew on the cheap.

[Randy]

I don't fault them for being cheap. Or for hiring Drew. Drew paid his dues, and had he gotten a head coaching job with another team, I think most would have said it was well deserved on his part.

Since the team is only $4 under the luxory tax, I think the real Q is how did we get to having such a high paid team? Seems like maybe they spent too much, or at least didn't spend very wisely. One problem is that if you look at Bibby, Marvin and ZaZa they all had off years. Sort of makes sense since they all got big $ deals. Seems like they are now just not putting out like they did before they got new contracts.

[Admin]

After that Sund article that Jeff Schultz did today, I'll have to change my opinion of the ASG. If they're not willing to go over the luxury tax to possibly upgrade the team, then I can't give them the benefit of the doubt anymore. They may not be "cheap . . cheap", but they're not big league owners. The only way this team gets over the top ( as is ), is if JJ, Horford, and Smoove play like top 3 guys at their respective positions.

This is exactly how I feel! I honestly feel that if the ASG had the means to go above the luxury tax like the big boys they would but they've been supporting the team minus one big chunk of their expected financial resources for what 5 years now? If I'm wrong in that Belkin is still having to pay his share then please correct me, but if I'm correct then we all need to realize that the remaining members of the ASG who are paying the bills have had to go above and beyond what they anticipated when buying the club because of this Belkin nonsense. As a fan I want them to spend whatever it takes to put together a championship team and I am disappointed that they don't but as an adult I can still respect them for going as high as they can go and still be able to afford the team.

The bottom line is that people need to stop throwing the word cheap around because it DOES NOT apply to how they're running the Hawks. If you want cheap then go take a look at the history of Sterling with the Clippers or believe it or not Paul Allen with the Blazers as they had a payroll that was $10 million less than us last year.

[Buzzard]

After that Sund article that Jeff Schultz did today, I'll have to change my opinion of the ASG. If they're not willing to go over the luxury tax to possibly upgrade the team, then I can't give them the benefit of the doubt anymore. They may not be "cheap . . cheap", but they're not big league owners. The only way this team gets over the top ( as is ), is if JJ, Horford, and Smoove play like top 3 guys at their respective positions.

Our goal is to continue to put an elite caliber ballclub on the floor and stay within the model [owner] Bill Davidson had when the Pistons were winning championships and what San Antonio did with their spending and the way they stayed under the luxury tax.

- Rick Sund

This pretty much says it all. And to think we could have had a decent young player at 31. I still do not get that. If their goal is to continue staying under the luxury tax, trading away (cheap players) picks is counter productive. I don't remember the Spurs and Pistons doing that.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Buzzard

[Buzzard]

The bottom line is that people need to stop throwing the word cheap around because it DOES NOT apply to how they're running the Hawks. If you want cheap then go take a look at the history of Sterling with the Clippers or believe it or not Paul Allen with the Blazers as they had a payroll that was $10 million less than us last year.

Staying under the luxury tax is cheap when we are one player away from competing with the elite IMO. I am not talking about signing a Bron or Kobe here. I am talking about using our MLE for a center/pf and keeping our draft picks.

With Horf and ZaZa as our two centers we are going to get crushed in the playoffs once again. That is not being elite. That is just staying under the luxury tax. There is a difference.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Buzzard

[Admin]

Staying under the luxury tax is cheap when we are one player away from competing with the elite IMO. I am not talking about signing a Bron or Kobe here. I am talking about using our MLE for a center/pf and keeping our draft picks.

With Horf and ZaZa as our two centers we are going to get crushed in the playoffs once again. That is not being elite. That is just staying under the luxury tax. There is a difference.

I respect your opinion but I have to disagree. Cheap is not signing JJ and letting him walk for nothing. It might not have been the greatest decision but when you have the highest paid player in the league on your team it's not possible to be called cheap.

Out of curiosity who is this one player that we are away from competing with the elite that we can sign for the MLE? I'm assuming that you're referring to Shaq but he's already said that he wants more than the MLE to sign with us. And even if we did sign him do you honestly think that his 20mpg he could give us are the difference between us competing with the elite and not competing with them?

I never said that we're elite so I'm not sure where that is coming from.

[Admin]

Just because there are people who are cheaper than the ASG doesn't prove that the ASG isn't cheap.

So then by your estimation if the Hawks are cheap then every team in the league with a payroll lower than the Hawks are also cheap, right? Where does the "cheap" line begin though? Is it right where the Hawks are? Is it at the luxury tax line? What do you consider the big spenders like the Lakers and Celtics to be? And what do you call the teams between the biggest spenders and the "cheap" teams like the Hawks?

[Sothron]

Just because there are people who are cheaper than the ASG doesn't prove that the ASG isn't cheap.

Exactly. That's like saying just because Hitler killed more people you can never accuse anyone else of murder.

[mrhonline]

Cheap isn't a good word.

Foolish would be a better one.

[Admin]

So then by your estimation if the Hawks are cheap then every team in the league with a payroll lower than the Hawks are also cheap, right? Where does the "cheap" line begin though? Is it right where the Hawks are? Is it at the luxury tax line? What do you consider the big spenders like the Lakers and Celtics to be? And what do you call the teams between the biggest spenders and the "cheap" teams like the Hawks?

All of you who say the Hawks are cheap please answer the questions I've asked above because I'd really like to understand where you're coming from.

[Buzzard]

I respect your opinion but I have to disagree. Cheap is not signing JJ and letting him walk for nothing. It might not have been the greatest decision but when you have the highest paid player in the league on your team it's not possible to be called cheap.

Out of curiosity who is this one player that we are away from competing with the elite that we can sign for the MLE? I'm assuming that you're referring to Shaq but he's already said that he wants more than the MLE to sign with us. And even if we did sign him do you honestly think that his 20mpg he could give us are the difference between us competing with the elite and not competing with them?

I never said that we're elite so I'm not sure where that is coming from.

Elite is not what you said it is what Gearon said. I was differing with his opinion. As far as being one player away here is my opinion on how we face up with the new big three.

Orlando, Need Shaq or similar big in order to have a reasonable chance to beat them

Miami, I think we can beat them with said big added

Boston, we can and have been able to beat them without said big

I do not think we are that far off even with the Heats obvious improvements. But staying pat will get us another 2nd round beat down; or quite possibly a seven game loss in the 1st round to a team like the Bucks or Bulls.

[niremetal]

Just because there are people who are cheaper than the ASG doesn't prove that the ASG isn't cheap.

So do you concede that Paul Allen is cheap, then? After all, he threatened to sue any team that played Darius Miles more than 10 days, thereby putting his contract back on the Blazers' books. And last year, he had the league's 3rd lowest payroll, $10M less than the Hawks'. He has avoided the luxury tax line like the plague since it was introduced.

So is Paul Allen cheap? If so, that's hilarious, since people have brought him up as the type of rich, big-spending owner that we need.

To me, cheap for the ASG stems from them investing more money in the same product and refusing to add to it. You've already bought the team, you are spending $67 million for this year and now the ASG decides to say "ok, thats enough let's not add on". That along with selling the 31st pick and at least a handful of other instances makes me decide the ASG are cheap. But above being cheap, the ASG are just buffoons.

Each team situation is different, so looking at payroll and then making an absolute judgement of what cheap is doesn't make sense. If the Marlins and Yankees both spend $100 million on payroll, are they equally cheap?

Ah, ok then. I guess you have super-secret inside information on the Hawks' revenues in order to make your judgment that their decision not to spend the luxury tax and selling the #31 pick was "cheap" rather than simply a shrewd business decision based on the team's projected revenues and expenses. Paul Allen has the benefit of owning a team that's the only show in town and has had a rabid fan base from Day 1 (albeit in a smaller city), but I suppose he can be excused for spending less than the Hawks because you apparently have some super-secret inside information that the Blazers make less money than the Hawks? If not that, then what's your basis for deciding when an owner is cheap?

All hail the almighty Hawks Fans Who Don't Care About Revenues And Expenses Because It's Other People's Money.

Edited July 21, 2010 by niremetal

[HawkItus]

My only question is why the urgency? If we wait who knows what deals will be available at the trade deadline. We have until Feb. to make a move. Until then we can bide our time and tread water. We will be in the discussion for the top four in the east if we make changes or not.