8/4 UPDATE: Collins to sign $125 million deal with the Hawks per Woj

[bird_dirt]

I could see a scenario for John to add a little more muscle (sans PEDs) and continues to develop to become Karl Malone Lite. I wouldn't expect the second coming of Stockton - Malone, but being just reliable enough for a go to when 3s aren't falling or to keep defenses off balance.

[RandomFan]

26 minutes ago, bird_dirt said:

I could see a scenario for John to add a little more muscle (sans PEDs) and continues to develop to become Karl Malone Lite. I wouldn't expect the second coming of Stockton - Malone, but being just reliable enough for a go to when 3s aren't falling or to keep defenses off balance.

Karl Malone lite you say?

[bird_dirt]

3 minutes ago, RandomFan said:

Karl Malone lite you say?

But with better hair! 

[Spud2nique]

1 hour ago, RandomFan said:

Karl Malone lite you say?

What in the world..

[Final_quest]

I like the signing.  It is an overpay, but losing him would hurt worse.  In the next few years there will be more Kent Bazemore type signings where mediocre starters get big pay days. It will be moveable/tradable if we need to go that route.  

[mrhonline]

 

[swanlee]

Glad this off season was a huge success. We did everything we needed to do. Now it's just up to the players and coaches.

[MarylandHawk]

On 8/7/2021 at 8:16 AM, bird_dirt said:

I could see a scenario for John to add a little more muscle (sans PEDs) and continues to develop to become Karl Malone Lite. I wouldn't expect the second coming of Stockton - Malone, but being just reliable enough for a go to when 3s aren't falling or to keep defenses off balance.

Adding weight is not going to happen. He is too well rounded and is still developing his perimeter game. The next thing that he will add is creating for himself off the dribble. He has trouble adding weight and the game is not really played in the paint anymore. I do think Trae and John will have a Stockon to Malone like connection though. 

[FL_BRYANT]

John does have to get stronger in the post so we don't have those lulls in scoring.  I'm not suggesting he forgo his perimeter game but I think it is short sighted of the league to move away from  the paint and midrange game. I think the playoffs showed how valuable this part of the game can be.

[JayBirdHawk]

17 hours ago, mrhonline said:

 

So the 4 year guarantee is 4yrs/$98.4 million. $8 million higher than the 4yrs/90 million the Hawks offered initially and just shy of the 4yr/$100 million most fans seemed ok with. Good deal.

[bleachkit]

35 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

So the 4 year guarantee is 4yrs/$98.4 million. $8 million higher than the 4yrs/90 million the Hawks offered initially and just shy of the 4yr/$100 million most fans seemed ok with. Good deal.

It's a 5 year guarantee. Last year is a player option. 

[AHF]

14 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

It's a 5 year guarantee. Last year is a player option. 

I don't think she was confused about that.  Just comparing apples to apples what the 4 year time frame of this looks like relative to what was reportedly offered and discussed on here.

I still think giving a player option on the last year was a bad choice.  I can't imagine Collins had anything resembling leverage in these negotiations other than the threat of ruining his relationship with the team and a player option doesn't seem like that kind of issue.  I don't see how he wouldn't have signed this deal without the player option.

Player options to me are more for situations where you need a carrot to entice the player to sign with you and so you essentially give them a shorter contract with a security blanket of the guaranteed option year.  That option is obviously a big negative for the team since it gives they worst of all worlds:  they can't keep the player if he is worth more than that amount but they have to pay him if he isn't worth close to that amount.  

I'm just not a fan of that at all.

[thecampster]

20 hours ago, mrhonline said:

 

I just saw that....they tightened up the structure. That is going to help a ton in 4-5 years.

[AHF]

2 hours ago, thecampster said:

I just saw that....they tightened up the structure. That is going to help a ton in 4-5 years.

Year 4 should be a big help.  Year 5 might cut the other way where it is more likely he will exercise his ability to opt out for that last year and we either have to pay him more to come back on a new deal or he leaves as an UFA.

[niremetal]

7 hours ago, AHF said:

I don't think she was confused about that.  Just comparing apples to apples what the 4 year time frame of this looks like relative to what was reportedly offered and discussed on here.

I still think giving a player option on the last year was a bad choice.  I can't imagine Collins had anything resembling leverage in these negotiations other than the threat of ruining his relationship with the team and a player option doesn't seem like that kind of issue.  I don't see how he wouldn't have signed this deal without the player option.

Player options to me are more for situations where you need a carrot to entice the player to sign with you and so you essentially give them a shorter contract with a security blanket of the guaranteed option year.  That option is obviously a big negative for the team since it gives they worst of all worlds:  they can't keep the player if he is worth more than that amount but they have to pay him if he isn't worth close to that amount.  

I'm just not a fan of that at all.

I thought that was weird too.

The only thing I can think of is that having a last year option of some sort might give the Hawks flexibility to "restructure" JC's contract before the 2024-25 season. IIRC, you can't restructure a contract in a way that reduces a player's salary for any of the seasons covered by the contract. I.e., if we would have made 2024-25 a regular contract year, we couldn't restructure/extend the contract unless we paid him more than $26.6M (or at least no less than $26.6M) that year, and subsequent years couldn't decrease by more than 8% per. We wouldn't have the option of coming to an agreement where we pay him him less than 2024-25 than his player option would pay, but extending his contract out 2-3 more seasons so that he comes out with more guaranteed money overall.

Maybe it's different with a player option year? I.e., JC could agree to waive his option in exchange for a longer contract? If there is an impression that JC is likely to want to stay in ATL even longer-term, that possibility might be worth something.

Of course, conversely, it's possible that Schlenk is simply much better at scouting talent than he is at negotiating contracts...

Edited August 9, 2021 by niremetal