Joe Johnson hate?

[Supporter]

Wow, I was just reading realgm general forum and there is a group of Joe Johnson haters out there that rival our own, specifically from the bulls (probably because Rose is the only all star on their team). I mean there was even a thread about how Joe might be one of the worst 5 time all stars out there. Really? After carrying the hawks back into the scheme of things? I'm just baffled by how much fans are manipulated by the media; how many times have we heard analysts mocking our signing of Joe. We can all agree that he is overpaid, but he's not a bad player because of that.

[WraithSentinel]

Realgm is only around for comedic relief. Having a tough day at work/school? Need a good laugh? Go read Realgm. It will have you going.

:beer: :lol6: :no-no: :laughing5:

Yes I read some of the stuff. I felt my IQ dropping with each post I read on there.

Edited February 4, 2011 by Paladin

[CBAreject]

Wow, I was just reading realgm general forum and there is a group of Joe Johnson haters out there that rival our own, specifically from the bulls (probably because Rose is the only all star on their team). I mean there was even a thread about how Joe might be one of the worst 5 time all stars out there. Really? After carrying the hawks back into the scheme of things? I'm just baffled by how much fans are manipulated by the media; how many times have we heard analysts mocking our signing of Joe. We can all agree that he is overpaid, but he's not a bad player because of that.

Joe Johnson is a top tier SG but not a superstar, falling behind Kobe and Wade. We overpaid him, but there was nothing else for us to do with his money, so it's a moot point. He would've signed somewhere else for similar money and had a better chance to win a title. He played like crap to start the season because he was hurt, but right now he is playing as well as he ever has. The question is not whether we should've resigned Johnson (we had to), but whether we should've signed/traded for him in the first place (we shouldn't have).

[Admin]

Well as an All-Star game performer he probably he among the worst ever but he's absolutely deserving of being an All-Star. I've got a strong feeling that this is FINALLY going to be the year where he puts on a show at the ASG ... although I'll settle for him simply playing a decent game after some of his recent ASG's.

[MaceCase]

Well as an All-Star game performer he probably he among the worst ever but he's absolutely deserving of being an All-Star. I've got a strong feeling that this is FINALLY going to be the year where he puts on a show at the ASG ... although I'll settle for him simply playing a decent game after some of his recent ASG's.

He had a good game last year and could of kept it going but he doesn't have as much juice as Lebron and Wade who were gunning for MVP. His first year there wasn't bad either but the two years in between were stinkers though. Don't worry comrades, I and others are putting the mostly Bulls and Knicks fans that are salty over Joe making it over Felton (lol) and Boozer (twice the games Joe missed) to bed.

[lethalweapon3]

I'm gonna guess that if it's RealGM, by now someone has already said, "Joe Johnson? He's no Andrea Bargnani!" Big-market teams (regardless of record) and idolized superstars rule there. Anybody remember last year's series of "fan polls" where the Raptors were picked to win the NBA title?

The perceived last-guys-in always get the vitriol on message boards. Last year it was Horf and this year it's Joe.

I was going to say last night to enjoy the calm before the storm of '(Insert Hawk Here) Shouldn't Have Gotten In Ahead of (My Guy)' fanboy threads started popping up elsewhere.

~lw3

[tremor]

Joe's not very popular amongst average fans. After last summer majority sees him as ridiculously overpaid (that was the message from the media) and it also works against him in that case.

[NineOhTheRino]

Joe's not very popular amongst average fans. After last summer majority sees him as ridiculously overpaid (that was the message from the media) and it also works against him in that case.

Not only fans. I was listening to BS Report earlier this year in which Simmons called the Joe Johnson contract one the the worst in sports history. I think if you were to do a poll among other sports reporters you'll get the same type of response. Joe has a rep as being a regular season player and that's not leaving him until he can carry this team past the 2nd round.

[niremetal]

Not only fans. I was listening to BS Report earlier this year in which Simmons called the Joe Johnson contract one the the worst in sports history. I think if you were to do a poll among other sports reporters you'll get the same type of response.

I was talking about this yesterday on the AJC blog. That meme bugs the hell out of me. There were multiple teams (notably NYK and Chi) openly wooing JJ with max contract offers. If the NBA didn't have a max salary per player (the only major sports league that does, far as I know), LeBron and Kobe would be making $30+M (maybe even $40M) per year, guys like D-12 would be making $25M-30M, and JJ would still be making in the $15-20M range. In that case, I think it's safe to say that no one would be saying that JJ's contract was the worst-ever. Why should that assessment change simply because the NBA and the players have decided to impose an arbitrary cap on how much LeBron and Kobe can get paid?

Saying JJ is overpaid by comparing his salary to guys like LeBron's and Kobe's makes no more sense than saying that Josh is overpaid by comparing him to Blake Griffin - Blake Griffin is neither an available option for the Hawks nor someone whose salary is set at a "market" level, so why should how much Griffin is getting paid affect our assessment of Josh? The same reasoning applies to the max salary level. Not every team can get a "one-man franchise" type player because there are only 3-4 of those guys in existence. All the teams know this. They have to make their decisions on who to sign based on the players actually available to them. If Kobe is not an option for a team but JJ is, why on EARTH should how much Kobe is getting paid affect how much they offer JJ? And if it shouldn't affect how much they offer JJ, then what's the basis for saying that JJ is "overpaid?"

Edited February 4, 2011 by niremetal

[frosgrim]

I was talking about this yesterday on the AJC blog. That meme bugs the hell out of me. There were multiple teams (notably NYK and Chi) openly wooing JJ with max contract offers. If the NBA didn't have a max salary per player (the only major sports league that does, far as I know), LeBron and Kobe would be making $30+M (maybe even $40M) per year, guys like D-12 would be making $25M-30M, and JJ would still be making in the $15-20M range. In that case, I think it's safe to say that no one would be saying that JJ's contract was the worst-ever. Why should that assessment change simply because the NBA and the players have decided to impose an arbitrary cap on how much LeBron and Kobe can get paid?

Saying JJ is overpaid by comparing his salary to guys like LeBron's and Kobe's makes no more sense than saying that Josh is overpaid by comparing him to Blake Griffin - Blake Griffin is neither an available option for the Hawks nor someone whose salary is set at a "market" level, so why should how much Griffin is getting paid affect our assessment of Josh? The same reasoning applies to the max salary level. Not every team can get a "one-man franchise" type player because there are only 3-4 of those guys in existence. All the teams know this. They have to make their decisions on who to sign based on the players actually available to them. If Kobe is not an option for a team but JJ is, why on EARTH should how much Kobe is getting paid affect how much they offer JJ?

Good points Nire.

I think most people don't really have a clue about the salary cap and how it levels out top-end pay for players. Plus, the market gets set every FA that the top guy available is getting very close to the max salary. I would be surprised if there is more than two years in the cap era where a FA hasn't signed for the max (either by his current team or switching teams).

[Atlantaholic]

The only problem I've got with the JJ deal is the length. I'm not saying I wouldn't have offered it, but I'm not thrilled about the contract. Saying it's the worst contract ever is beyond ridiculous though. Rashard Lewis, Stephen Marbury, Peja Sojokavic, Elton Brand, Michael Redd, Andrei Kirilenko etc. (Just off the top of my head) are MUCH worse contracts for players that are for the most part no where near as good as JJ (who has made 5 consecutive All - Star appearances). I think a lot of the flak had to do with the timing of the contract. If JJ had blown up in the playoffs most people wouldn't have kicked up such a fuzz, but considering how he played during one of the worst (the worst?) playoff performances by a third seed in NBA history, I think that's what influenced people's reaction to the deal.

[CBAreject]

The only problem I've got with the JJ deal is the length. I'm not saying I wouldn't have offered it, but I'm not thrilled about the contract. Saying it's the worst contract ever is beyond ridiculous though. Rashard Lewis, Stephen Marbury, Peja Sojokavic, Elton Brand, Michael Redd, Andrei Kirilenko etc. (Just off the top of my head) are MUCH worse contracts for players that are for the most part no where near as good as JJ (who has made 5 consecutive All - Star appearances). I think a lot of the flak had to do with the timing of the contract. If JJ had blown up in the playoffs most people wouldn't have kicked up such a fuzz, but considering how he played during one of the worst (the worst?) playoff performances by a third seed in NBA history, I think that's what influenced people's reaction to the deal.

One of the worst. there has to be a 3rd seed to lose in the first round. We also have one of the worst performances by a 1st seed in 1994 when we lost to a far inferior Pacers team in the 2nd round and almost lost to a crummy heat team in the 1st round. That was probably the 3rd worst performance by a first seed in history...but it's only because the 8th seed we played was really crappy.

Am I the only one who is still so freaking mad about 1994. I need to get over that, I guess, but my god...we really dominated teams that year. We broke Houston's 15 game win-streak as I remember. We used to blow out teams by 30 points. Then we traded our lone star for Johnny Vanilla.

[lethalweapon3]

For worse 5-timers I went with the great:

Rudy LaRusso

Don Ohl

Wayne Embry

I won't waste time fussing with RealGM tweens over the modern-day guys, but for the original question, "Is there a worse 5-time All-Star than... Joe Johnson?", there are at least three answers for them to work with.

~lw3

[Seano]

Not only fans. I was listening to BS Report earlier this year in which Simmons called the Joe Johnson contract one the the worst in sports history. I think if you were to do a poll among other sports reporters you'll get the same type of response. Joe has a rep as being a regular season player and that's not leaving him until he can carry this team past the 2nd round.

Yep. It's in the playoffs where you really define yourself so far as perception goes, such as D-Wade's playoff performance in 2006, which vaulted his perception from being just another great player into being a true superstar worthy of constructing an entire team around.

And the Joe Johnson haters can suck it, by the way. He is an excellent player.

[Atlantaholic]

One of the worst. there has to be a 3rd seed to lose in the first round. We also have one of the worst performances by a 1st seed in 1994 when we lost to a far inferior Pacers team in the 2nd round and almost lost to a crummy heat team in the 1st round. That was probably the 3rd worst performance by a first seed in history...but it's only because the 8th seed we played was really crappy.

Oh yeah. I was alluding to just the Orlando series not the entire playoffs. The guy played pretty well against Milwaukee.