20 Million...

[Playmaker0017]

Alright, we are definitely flawed and are going nowhere this year, but let's look at it.

We have over 20 million sitting on the bench. The 11 million in the contract with Brandon. Crawford making 3 million. Henderson sitting on the bench making 8 million. Not to mention Ekezie taking up space and cap on the bench, and is a virtual nothing.

Let's look at this objectively... we are handicapped by having a quarter of our salary cap being inactive or virtually useless. If we had access to this money, you could easily sign two all-stars or three very, very good players or one Shaq.

Thus, while I blame our players and coaches for lack of execution and overall basketball IQ ... I place the vast majority of the blame in our old front office and its foolish signings and overpayments.

Hopefully our new group will use this money and build us a winner in 2004-2005.

Play.

[Traceman]

salary! You can't have it both ways! You are blaming management for what you WANTED them to do! Remember, trading Dog for capspace was addition by subtraction. Yeah right!

At least 2 on this board (Diesel and myself) said that trading Dog from Brandon's ending salary did not help the team, all it did was keep management from paying the luxury tax. If we had traded Dog for Spree or even Van Horn, AS A FAN, I could have taken that a lot better than trading him for capspace. As I have said many times, I don't care if the Hawks pay the luxury tax or not, I just want to see them win. As a fan, I don't have to care about their financial situation. And I don't. I want to see them win. Period!

[cyman3]

c'mon now... that trade cant be evaluated right now...

it was a move thats suppose to help us in the future...

[Diesel]

Move made for the future???

Come on man.

There's nothing in the future that is attainable that would not have been attainable had we had the right owners. For instance, the Atl Spirit... I believe that they would spend money to win. They would have probably passed on the trade and still signed JT....

Imagine that...

The luxury tax doesn't effect anyone but the owner. Cheap McDavid would have gutted this team and probably played rookies for the next 4 years... Until he made his profit, then he would have left. That's what happened in Dallas. If you notice, he wants a franchise... Any franchise...It's a plan.

Trading a player for space is a sign that the team is not dedicated to winning.

Like Trace said, We could have gotten back Spree or Van Horn... It would have been much better than getting Nothing.

About the future...

1. We will still be over the cap.

2. Dog's contract would have come off with Reef's and Theo's and that is still the same time we will have to wait to be under the cap.

The statement Move for the future is such a JOKE. There is No future in that move. There is no benefit in that trade that we would not have had anyway.

The guys who supported that trade in hopes that down the line, we would benefit DiD not look at the facts. The facts are, there are NONE.... We are not in a better place Salarywise (other than the owner not having to pay Luxury taxes). To the fan, Luxury taxes don't matter.

[Weez]

you're simply being an idiot on this matter

[Playmaker0017]

Trace,

As a matter of fact, I would still do that trade.

I was pointing out that we have over 20MM sitting. I could handle 11MM, but we have over 20MM.

So, while we moan and complain, I was trying to point out that we don't even have our full lineup. Once Brandon is off, we have cap space for two REALLY good players or one excellent player.

That was my point.

The other point about OLD management is: signing people to enormous contracts. (Crawford, Henderson)

Play.

[Diesel]

NO, I have point out the FACTS and the facts are that there are NO FUTURE gains from the stupid trade....

NONE.

Now, are you going to call names like some punk ass pissy butt little boy are will you prove or disprove your point like a man?

[Diesel]

With Big Dog on the Roster with Terry's contract off the books, we were 8 million dollars over the cap (about 53 million). With Big Dog off the books, we went to 42 million. That's three Million under the cap (that doesn't really kick in til Feb). THen we signed JT to a frontloaded contract, this year he makes 8. Next year he'll make about 5. We signed Jax to a deal I believe about 2 mill per. We signed Dion to a 1 Million dollar deal.

Bottom line..

We are at 64 mill in actuallity. When TB comes off, we will be at about 52-53 million (because of JT's contract). Next year when JT's contract heads back down to about 4-5 Million (Glover/Nailon), we will be at 44... With one roster spot open because of the absence of Glover/Nailon.

With the Cap being predicted to be 45 Million, we will only have about 1 million to spend... That will bring in NO FAs...

What we have is JT/Jax... 2 of the 4 horsemen....

We traded Big Dog and all we got back is JT/Jax...

[Playmaker0017]

Deez,

I would NEVER have resigned Terry to begin with.

He isn't worth 8 million. He is FAR too flawed.

People can say what they want about his scoring, shooting, rebounding.... but the simple fact is:

HE CAN'T SEE THE FLOOR!!!

HE CAN'T DEFEND MY GRANDMOTHER!!!

He is not a well-rounded player. I would rather a guy who scores 5-8 PPG but can run the point start in front of Terry at PG... oh, wait.... we do have that player...

Play.

[TheDude]

oh geez people... trading for the cap room was fine... it was a move for the future, get used to it.. several other teams were trying to get that contract... in the offseason when we have this money to sign people, you'll be glad we did it..

crawford, henderson, ekezie are the main points of what play is talking about...

crawford is a waste...henderson makes too much money for someone who is just a solid backup that doesn't play very much and ekezie is just bad luck...

anybody know when crawford's contract expires..

[Diesel]

Please Doc,

Explain how this move affects the future???

I think more obvious was that it was a move that saved/made the current Owners (AOL/TW) some money. That's all that was accomplished. There is not a future implication because we are still at or slightly over the cap. i.e. we are still in debt but NOt as much.

[Diesel]

In total, JT's deal is a very cheap one.

Three year 22.5 Million.

That's an average of over 7 a year... But it's frontload... JT makes so much this year and I think it goes down to 6 Million next year... Or something like that.

[Packfill]

Umm, I would trade Big Dog for Terry and Jackson any day of the week. At least they are young and have relatively acceptable attitudes. Big Dog is on the fast track for a decline.

Even though the Hawks suck now, I would still to the Dog for Brandon trade. Brandon comes of the books soon and if we are lucky, Hendu comes off this summer in the expansion draft. Actually, he is probably a good pick-up for Charlotte because they are required to spend a certain amount of money and his contract will help them get to that level while also carrying younger/low cost players. Then his contract is over when they can go after a free agent.

Everyone complains that his team needs a star, while the only way that happens is through the draft. I rather suck now and win some championships with Dwight Howard in the middle down the road.

[Diesel]

EDS the point was that with the right owner, we could have had Dog & JT & Jackson...

Jackson = MCE.

Terry = Resign.

Yes, we would have been over the cap...

Also, I challenge your statement that Big Dog had a bad attitude.

[Playmaker0017]

Deez,

I don't think it was "bad attitude", but he was not a really good defender nor did he move without the ball or pass well.

I am not a Big Dog fan, but I also believe we would be better right now then with Dion/Jackson. Dion/Jackson have both assumed the role of putting it up religiously --- and I would rather Big Dog put it up 17+ times a game then EITHER Jackson or Glover.

Play.

[Packfill]

I may be off on the attitude thing but he strikes me as one of those guys . . . (don't know him in person so just unsubstantiated, uninformed opinion).

But, I still like the Brandon trade. I may be wrong, but I don't think we win even with Big Dog on the roster, so I rather give minutes to some young guys. I guess I just feel like Big Dog's stats are hollow.

As a fan, I am much more excited to see Boris and Travis play than Dog - they ain't much but both are athletic and seem to try hard, and with this team, that's more than we are getting from the vets.

[Traceman]

about the future but rather about the right now. The move allowed the owners to avoid paying luxury tax for this upcoming season but it has no bearing on our future. If anything, it HURT our future because we gave away an asset for nothing (well at least not much) tangible. Remember, Dog's contract expires at the same time Reef's, Theo, Hendu's and CC's. Until all those salaries are off the books, we can't really do much to remake the roster unless we do trades.

We WON'T have money to sign players in the off season as a result of the Dog trade because signing anyone of significance will force us to pay the luxury tax next season. That would defeat the purpose of making the trade. If we were going to use Dog's salary to sign a player(s), we would have just traded for Spree, Van Horn or someone similar.

There is one way I can see that the Dog trade could be considered good for the team. If we blow it up now and trade some combination of Reef, Theo, Hendu and/or CC for contracts that expire after THIS year, then trading Dog COULD be considered good because it would allow us to start rebuilding a year early. If we don't trade any of those guys though, the trade will merely serve as a salary savings for ownership (as it was originally intended to be).

[Playmaker0017]

Trace,

You are thinking too narrow-minded.

Maybe these owners are happy they aren't going to be paying luxury tax this year. Why would you want to?

This club would be sub-500, with or without Big Dog. They will continue to be sub-500 until they remove JT from the PG position and place in a real PG. Every analyst sees this!

So, what incentive do they have in paying a luxury tax for a team that wasn't going to win in the first place?

Next year, you lose Glover, Jackson, Hendu, Ekezie & Brandon's salaries and JT's salary falls. Reef is the kind of guy that would take a salary hit if it helped the team improve.

So, they go into the salary tax area next year with a lineup that can win. It makes more sense to do it then instead of paying money now.

The move doesn't hurt or help this year... but could help us next year, IF these owners are committed to winning.

Play.

[chillzatl]

That decision was made by someone else before they even came into the picture. At that point in time it was looking like McDavid was going to be the new owner, not atlspirit.

Time warner made the decision because THEY don't want to pay the luxury tax. It's premature to assume that the new owner, lifelong Hawks basketball fans, would make a move that damaged the team in the eyes of many casual fans, just to save a few bucks.

[Diesel]

It's your mind that is narrow.

what both I and trace are talking about is losing Big Dog for NOTHING.

Too many of you have become caught up in the fact that we got rid of Big Dog. But what did we get in return....

Nothing. ABSOLUTELY Nothing. Nothing Now, nothing later.

What if Big Dog could have gotten us Spreewell.

What if Big Dog could have gotten us Van Horn.

What if Big Dog could have gotten us Wells and Patterson.

What if Big Dog could have gotten us Rose.

The thing is that Big Dog got us NOTHING....

That's why it was stupid to do.