No brainer here, if you can do it, do it.
definition of a freak athlete: 6'8, 7 ft wingspan, 39 inch vertical...And is only 24 years old. Contract is a little high for my taste but the guy has undeniable talent. The only problem I see with his game is that it just doesn't get better season after season. I figured his jump shot would be much better by now and he seems to make quite a few "bonehead plays" per game. Hard to say his game would not improve the spurs though.
15% trade kicker = not a chance.
Good question. From my understanding, it's an automatic payout in full once the trade is complete.
My guess is they know they can get Childress back over here for 5-6 million per year, and are willing to move Smith out to get the 'discount' on their starting SF.
Josh smith is the type of Player that the spurs need....id like to see him in Silver and black!
me too but it's just a dream we need to wake up quickly
Yeah very true... it is very early here on the west coast! Lol, maybe I just did wake up...
good morning, josh smith is not coming, I repeat JS is not coming....... but RMJ is back !
bingo and hawks have the right to match childress
It's not like the Hawks aren't willing to spend (lol Joe Johnson), so why would they want to ship out Josh Smith? His contract is pretty fair for his talent level, age, and good track record, IMO.
If you do Teague instead of Bibby, you don't have to give up McDyess.
I like this trade better.
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMa...radeId=25t6l5o
I dont think we need josh smith since we have too many PFs in td, blair, and mcdyess. if we could get a third team involved like ny or something then maybe a trade could work.
i know this might be re ed, but i also think a trade like this would be kinda cool (just cuz i have a boner for wallace lol):
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMa...radeId=29ynoan
Last edited by Spurs808; 07-06-2010 at 12:45 PM.
Simple, really. With the signing of Johnson they've pretty much locked themselves into a roster that's probably plateaued -- a team that isn't championship-caliber whose ceiling is probably ECF.
Now, why they'd put themselves into that position by overpaying Johnson is another matter, but they've got their reasons -- he's their best and most indispensable player and he's theirs. He's become a 'Hawk' and probably the best they can get.
So maybe them signing Johnson was something they did fully aware of what the next step would be if their intention was to vie for a championship. I have my doubts but let's give them the benefit of the doubt.
What would make sense for them? What kind of player could justify them paying Johnson and dispensing of Smith. I've got to think a certain championship-caliber point guard would definitely fit the bill, but would the Spurs be a willing partner? I have my doubts but I guess it's possible.
Smith's 15% trade-kicker is definitely brutal and I've got to think they'd have to view Smith as almost solely a 4 for them. But with the possibility of the Spurs also being in a similar position as the Hawks -- a team that's plateaued below championship-caliber -- I guess it's something they'd strongly have to consider -- especially if they believe it to be likely that Parker bolts next year without compensation (which I'm not sold on).
It could just end up being a lateral move for both parties (I'd think it'd definitely benefit the Hawks, though) but if they were brought forth the package I believe B-Town Spur originally suggested -- Smith and Teague -- I'm guessing it'd give them something to think about.
Parker --> Knicks
Lee sign-and-trade --> Hawks
Smith --> Spurs
could that work/happen?
No. The Hawks want a star PG, and Lee probably wouldn't agree to sign for enough of a discount to make it worthwhile for the Hawks on that front either. Remember that Smith is going to make about $10M next season, which isn't bad considering his contributions.
And . . . no one would ever complain about small ball ever again.
Seriously though, I don't think I want a PG that will compete with Hill for the starting job. We either give Hill the job or keep Parker. As much as I don't think Hill is a legit PG, I don't mind him starting with Manu.
Would a Hill/Ginobili/Smith/Duncan/Splitter lineup be the only one in the league that can match up with Fisher/Bryant/Odom/Gasol/Bynum?
Pop would play Smith at the SF and limit him to shooting the corner 3. Spurs fans would lament that Smith is no better SF than RJ.
fixing the three with smith great what able the point guard it would be worse then the three now
Huh? Ducks Latin?
... That one goes on the ducks Wall of Fame.
Parker >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Smith.
bruno wtf you chiefin on mane, smith >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>......... parker
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
