Potential Acquisition: Josh Smith

[Ghost Writer]

Player Profile (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/josh_smith/)

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/10/24/hawks-spurn-josh-smith/

Hawks Spurn Josh Smith
Posted Oct 24th 2007 10:15AM by Tom Ziller
Filed under: Hawks, Atlanta

The Hawks have famously had many, many high draft picks over the past several years. Not a terribly high amount have turned out to be good players. Josh Smith is one whom did turn out good, awesome in fact. Picked #17 in 2004, he's probably among the five best players in that draft class right now. Billy Knight should be proud...

... except now the Hawks don't want to pay Smith. With the rookie extension period edging toward closure next week, Smith's agents bristled at Atlanta lack of interest in an extension and have called off negotiations, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's Sekou Smith. The agents say Atlanta made one offer back in July and "haven't really shown any interest" since.

We don't know how much the Hawks offered Smith -- I'd guess the low side of $45 million. If Josh has an identical season as 2006-07 this year (and teams have cap space, which isn't a given), I could see Atlanta having to decide whether to hand over $70 million or not. Smith's a special defensive player who hasn't even turned 22 yet. He's 6-foot-9 and finished second in blocks last year. And he can score. And his team will be better; wins equal dollars. As Sekou Smith notes, only Josh and Shawn Marion finished last year above 16 points per game and in the top 20 in rebounds, blocks, and steals. This is not a player you gamble with on the market. If Atlanta ever does decide they want to keep him, they'll be paying out the nose to do so.

[Holt's Cat]

Well, they balked at the Spurs' offer for Josh Childress so I'm not sure they would be enticed by a similiar offer for Smith.

[Ghost Writer]

I read in Sports Illustrated two weeks ago that the Hawks did indeed offer $45 million and that one high-ranking Western GM feels that most teams won't offer him much more than that because of his past attitude problems and clashes with his coach.

Look at his position, his PPG and BPG.

Do we have the money and/or desire this summer?

Question.

[MoSpur]

I've always been a huge fan of Smith, but doubt SA has the $$ to try to lure him here.

[Mark in Austin]

There's no way you get Smith without giving up Parker or Ginobili, plus having to take back a crap large contract.

If the Hawks weren't interested in trading Childress, I don't think they're trading their best player.

I like him on the Spurs though.

[Holt's Cat]

I read in Sports Illustrated two weeks ago that the Hawks did indeed offer $45 million and that one high-ranking Western GM feels that most teams won't offer him much more than that because of his past attitude problems and clashes with his coach.

Look at his position, his PPG and BPG.

Do we have the money and/or desire this summer?

Question.

Spurs have their MLE ($5.5 mil or so).

[Ghost Writer]

I've always been a huge fan of Smith, but doubt SA has the $$ to try to lure him here.
Can we confirm this?

$45 million over how many years?

[Ghost Writer]

Spurs have their MLE ($5.5 mil or so).
But I thought they have more to play with if they let K. Thomas walk?

[Ghost Writer]

I'm trying to figure out what the Spurs could offer him this summer.


By the by, if the Hawks won't ante up, why are they not trying to deal this kid?

[Holt's Cat]

But I thought they have more to play with if they let K. Thomas walk?


Nah, if anything they will have less. They can re-sign Thomas without using their MLE. They will need some bigs going forward as I expect this will probably be Horry's last year in the NBA. An overlooked benefit of the Thomas trade is that they won't necessarily have to use their MLE to sign a big, so it could be devoted entirely to signing a swingman.

A 6 year deal starting at $5.5 mil per would be roughly $40 mil total.

[Holt's Cat]

The Spurs don't have a shot at meaningful cap room until 2010.

[MoSpur]

I'm trying to figure out what the Spurs could offer him this summer.


By the by, if the Hawks won't ante up, why are they not trying to deal this kid?

Because the Hawks probably will make another offer for more money to try to keep him.

[Ghost Writer]

Nah, if anything they will have less. They can re-sign Thomas without using their MLE. They will need some bigs going forward as I expect this will probably be Horry's last year in the NBA. An overlooked benefit of the Thomas trade is that they won't necessarily have to use their MLE to sign a big, so it could be devoted entirely to signing a swingman.

A 6 year deal starting at $5.5 mil per would be roughly $40 mil total.
I admittedly don't understand the intricacies here.

If Thomas makes about $9 million, why don't the Spurs have that much to spend at the end of the year by letting him walk?

[Holt's Cat]

I admittedly don't understand the intricacies here.

If Thomas makes about $9 million, why don't the Spurs have that much to spend at the end of the year by letting him walk?


Because they'd still be over the cap.

[MoSpur]

The Spurs will have around $52-54 million committed to players next season. I don't know what the cap figure is going to be next season.

[ss1986v2]

But I thought they have more to play with if they let K. Thomas walk?
KT makes the same amount basically that barry+elson was making. letting him walk is no different from letting them walk before the trade. spurs look to only have about the MLE to spend, which is around 5.5 mil. that 45 mil offer by the hawks was likely over 5 or 6 years (so between 7.5 and 9 mil per).

plus josh is a RFA, meaning the hawks can simply match any offer he gets. and with the limited number of teams with significant cap space this summer, there probably arent any teams that can offer anywhere near that 45 mil. its not that the hawks dont want to pay josh, they are just looking to sign him for the lowest amount possible. which they are likely to do (unless they pull an orlando and outbid themselves).

[MoSpur]

You have to add the fact that the Spurs are going to have Splitter on their roster next season and they might try to find someone cheaper.

[Ghost Writer]

I see.

So next year, more payouts are scheduled that this year or the cap is set less or something?

I thought the cap remained set, so there would be $9 million to play with.

[Holt's Cat]

Spurs are targeting 2010 as the year to have some significant cap flexibility.

A quick look at some free agents then:

Joe Johnson
Adam Morrison
Tyrus Thomas
LeBron James (option) - expected to exercise
Stephen Jackson
Al Harrington
Tracy McGrady
Mike Miller
Udonis Haslem
Raja Bell
Amare Stoudemire (option)
Travis Outlaw
Brad Miller

[Holt's Cat]

I see.

So next year, more payouts are scheduled that this year or the cap is set less or something?

I thought the cap remained set, so there would be $9 million to play with.


Spurs are way over the cap this year and are bumping up against the lux tax threshold.

[ss1986v2]

I see.

So next year, more payouts are scheduled that this year or the cap is set less or something?

I thought the cap remained set, so there would be $9 million to play with.
thats not how things work. the cap is set at 55.6 mil this season. the luxury tax line is 67.8 mil. the spurs current salary is right around 67.2 mil (give or take a could 100k). so if the spurs let finley (3.1 mil), horry (3.6 mil), and KT (8.1 mil) walk, that free up 14.8 mil in salary. factoring in next years salary increases for all the other signed players, and that leaves the spurs at a salary of right around 55 mil. the cap usually increases 2-4 mil a year, but lets just say the cap increases to an even 60 mil. that leaves the spurs with only 5 mil in cap space. which is less than what the MLE (5.5 mil or so) would be worth. spurs will just accept the MLE and use that, because its a larger amount.

[Ghost Writer]

Thanks for the clarity.

I did not realize we were already over the cap!

Dang.

[Holt's Cat]

A normal year for the Spurs in that regard.

[MoSpur]

Isn't Dwayne Wade expected to be free agents or at least have the option to test the waters?

[Holt's Cat]

Isn't Dwayne Wade expected to be free agents or at least have the option to test the waters?


Perhaps. A lot of players have options in their deals at various times so it's quite possible that a good crop will be available in free agency. Not that I expect the Spurs to have a great shot at landing any of those top tier free agents (ie LeBron). But the Spurs might be in a good position to pick up some second tier free agents and/or find some opportunistic trades to execute.

[Ghost Writer]

Isn't Dwayne Wade expected to be free agents or at least have the option to test the waters?
I think that is in 2010... when we'll have the most flexibility.

[MoSpur]

Will players want to come to SA's small market when SA has all that money??? That's the big question. Duncan will be a bit older.

[Holt's Cat]

Will players want to come to SA's small market when SA has all that money??? That's the big question. Duncan will be a bit older.

I think we know the answer for the top tier. But it might not be so for second tier free agents plus there may be some trades that can be facilitated by the cap room.

[Ghost Writer]

Despite what happened in 2003, I don't buy the excuses of:

1. San Antonio is sleepy small market town
2. Players did not want to play in the shadow of Duncan

I really don't.

I recall the top free agents that summer all having lots of options and signed with teams that could offer a little more than the Spurs at the time, be it more money, exposure, opportunity, familiarity with current team, close to family, etc.

I really feel like in 2010 that a free agent might want to be "the man" on the Spurs provided he can't get more money elsewhere.

It's about the money and then all that other crap.

Duncan will be the David Robinson role by then.

[Holt's Cat]

Duncan has a low post game and a good back. He might be chipping in 20 and 10 until he's 36.

[Holt's Cat]

The top tier free agents make their money outside of their NBA contracts. The market size as well as its attractiveness matters for them.

[Ghost Writer]

Duncan has a low post game and a good back. He might be chipping in 20 and 10 until he's 36.
That's why I say Duncan is a draw and not a detriment.

[Holt's Cat]

So LeBron is going to spurn the Knicks and sign with the Spurs?

[Ghost Writer]

The top tier free agents make their money outside of their NBA contracts. The market size as well as its attractiveness matters for them.
It's a factor, but not the factor.

Marketable players extend well beyond their market.

I don't recall any Knicks or Clippers or Pistons with huge marketing deals.


Cleveland is a big-time market?


Don't use small market as a crutch.

[Holt's Cat]

It's a factor, but not the factor.

Marketable players extend well beyond their market.

I don't recall any Knicks or Clippers or Pistons with huge marketing deals.


Cleveland is a big-time market?


Don't use small market as a crutch.


Elton Brand had an endorsement deal that wouldn't pay if he went to San Antonio. So he ends up in the 2nd largest US media market. Go figure.

[Holt's Cat]

How'd James end up in Cleveland? It's not like he chose the Cavs when he entered the league.

[Ghost Writer]

Elton Brand had an endorsement deal that wouldn't pay if he went to San Antonio. So he ends up in the 2nd largest US media market. Go figure.
Wouldn't pay?

I seem to recall the Clippers being able to offer him more than the Spurs in terms of salary.

Duncan has several endorsements for a dry-as-toast superstar.

And the point is about Lebron that if you are a superstar and can smile for the camera, you can sell in a small market.

Again, big market does not mean better marketability.

I think if the money is right, a free agent will come in 2010.

[Holt's Cat]

Wouldn't pay?

I seem to recall the Clippers being able to offer him more than the Spurs in terms of salary.

They didn't.



Duncan has several endorsements for a dry-as-toast superstar.

And the point is about Lebron that if you are a superstar and can smile for the camera, you can sell in a small market.


No, you have guys who end up being big names coming into the draft and capitalize on that. Maybe you are fortunate and draft one of those and he decides he likes it in your city and now with the post-'99 cap rules you have an advantage in being able to re-sign him. What exactly does SA have to offer over NYC or LA though, straight up?





Again, big market does not mean better marketability.

I think if the money is right, a free agent will come in 2010.

Who was the last top tier superstar who spurned a big market and left his team for a smaller market? Better yet, one of the smallest in all of pro sports?

[Ghost Writer]

The Clippers were able to offer more by re-signing Brand, which you just alluded to.

What top-tier superstar from a big market will be a free agent in 2010?

Surely one of the free agents won't think that San Antonio is a dump, especially if he can be the man after Duncan retires.

I can't believe I am arguing for clearing cap space.

What is wrong with me?

Nevermind.

You're right.

Or I'm still right.

Trade for talent.

[Holt's Cat]

So we should expect the Spurs to land a LeBron James in free agency?

[Ghost Writer]

So we should expect the Spurs to land a LeBron James in free agency?
No.

Hence the urgency to trade for talent.

[Holt's Cat]

OK, well I'm sure if a trade is out there it will be explored. Now it's time to watch this team defend its 4th championship.