Joe Johnson Watch: The Day Before
by The Human Highlight Blog on Jun 30, 2010 10:30 AM EDT
Email
Print
It's fitting that, as we near the kickoff for free agency, it's looking and sounding like Joe Johnson has slipped to second banana status even in the context of "where will they go" discussions currently flooding all corners of NBA coverage.
Oh yes, he is mentioned on all the shows, but further down the list than even a month ago, and on ESPN's 1950's-ish Free Agency Summit last night, but not in a "he's the man" way. Heck, he didn't even merit a banner in the background of ESPN's McLaughlin Group homage.
It's become clear, in all of these conversations, that Joe is a fallback plan piece, a Plan B or C, to all these teams that have cleared a path for the real big hitters of this free agency forum. Michael Wilbon, during the course of free agent discussion on ESPN's Pardon the Interruption, mentioned that Johnson "isn't a #1", but as a #3, he'd be great! Wilbon is not alone around the league on this assessment.
Wonderful. So now, as the Hawks maintain that they will do all they can to resign Johnson, it stands to mention that the Hawks might end up mortgaging the next six seasons for a player who is better suited as a second or third option on a team today, at 29 years old, but get paid like a #1, and be paid that way until he's 34. Scary.
Joe is/has been a great player, but has always been miscast as some sort of superstar, even in star-starved Atlanta. His numbers, beyond All-Star game count, has never proven that reputation out. He's a great shot maker, plays a very physical brand of basketball, but it seems the rest of the league and those who watch the NBA is getting around to the same conclusions as Bird Watchers have....Joe is not a max player, doesn't quite rise to the level of a top-shelf free agent, candidate, and is, at best a fallback plan for a team that has the financial resources to swallow an above market contact well beyond the years of peak performance.
40 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’d be ok with re-signing Joe for 3 or 4 years. 6 years — not so much. Giving a max deal to an aging not quite superstar who hasn’t managed to even win you one game in the second round doesn’t make sense to me.
Why would the Hawks want to bring Joe back?
My first reaction would be because they don’t want to take a step backwards. You guys, THHB, Hoopinion, KB, HawkStr8talk, have done a good job convincing me that it would be ok to take a slight step backwards. It might not even be a severe step back depending on what moves they make and further development of Al Horford and Josh Smith.
So why would the owners and the franchise want Joe back? They have marketed him as a superstar even though he is a notch or two under the top line guys. Yet would his not resigning effect season ticket sales in anyway? We are not going to be projected as the fourth best team in the east anymore or a potential 50 win team without Joe. Winning does effect the bottom line as in attendance. Phillips Arena wasn’t packed this past season but there were more people there than when we were stuck in the lottery.
I don’t want to give him a max deal but he isn’t going to sign for 3 or 4 years nor should he. Paul Pierce isn’t going to worth what he is making at the end of his contract and neither is Kobe Bryant but those guys have championships to their credit. I want financial flexibility the way Oklahoma City has but yet again that will require tearing it most of the way down and building again.
If we sign Joe then I will support it as we need to be really good for the next couple of seasons. If we don’t then I only want to replace him with perhaps Childress and try and garner some flexibility where we can add something significant down the line. Right now this team’s future lies with Al Horford and the Hawks do have to think about re-signing him in the near future as well.
http://www.peachtreehoops.com/
The thing is
from all the comments I’ve read, which is some but probably not as much as the rest of you, Joe seems to be aware of his not a number 1 status and actually seems to be considering accepting a lesser contract in order to play in a title-possible situation.
Does anyone else here find this ironic, that Joe “I’m the Man” Johnson has suddenly realized he won’t get a title as a number 1—-but the Atlanta “We So Slow” Hawks have not???
What may happen—I hope this happens—is that Joe looks at that 6-year contract straight in the inkblack and says, “No. It’s still the Hawks.” And walks away from it to take a four-year sign-and-trade with Dallas. And the Hawks get saved from their own stupidity by a player’s own better recognition of the situation…so that in the end both the Hawks and Joe are better off, without each other.
With the Market the way it is
I don’t see Joe getting anything less than a 5 year deal.
http://www.peachtreehoops.com/
by Kris Willis on Jun 30, 2010 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Whither 4 or 5...
Is it becoming clear that Joe would prefer to sign elsewhere and save the Hawks’ bacon, or is that just wishful thinking on my part?
I haven't seen Joe comment one way or the other as to where he would prefer to sign
I am afraid that it is that simple, if Joe wants to come back then the Hawks will pay him whatever. If he doesn’t then the Hawks will try and do a sign and trade to wherever he wants to go.
http://www.peachtreehoops.com/
by Kris Willis on Jun 30, 2010 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions
There's a lot of assuming and supposition.
When it comes down to it, does anyone really think Joe is going to turn down $27 million, and unless he can hook onto the team that ends up signing Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh (Miami possibly), he’s not going to have a better chance at a title as he would in Atlanta. If he wants to win a title, IMO, his best chance would be to sign a salary cap friendly deal in Atlanta, allowing the Hawks to pay Al Horford down the road but also allowing the flexibility to add to the core in the next couple of years.
At a max deal, then Atlanta has to go all in and a big move needs to be made after this deal to put Atlanta over the top. I do not want to get rid of Josh Smith, but if the Hawks resign Joe Johnson at the max, then they have to see if New Orleans would be interested in Josh Smith in some sort of deal for Chris Paul. Listen to the deals that have been mentioned for Paul. They won’t be able to get a better player than Josh Smith in any deal, IMO, and Josh is a budding superstar in this league. He would take that next step if he would just play smarter.
http://soaringdownsouth.com/
I don't think they'd do that...
and if I’m the Hornets, anyone who wants Paul is taking Emeka Okafor with him.
well make them take Marvin also
Then you also have your Center.
No I don’t think they would do that either without Paul demanding a trade, but I would fathom that Josh Smith might be the best offer that they would get.
http://www.peachtreehoops.com/
So Smoove, Bibby and Marvin for Paul and Okafor?...
I’d say Bibby to make the total salaries match.
Paul Teague
Joe Jamal? Jordan Crawford
Chill? Mo Evans
Al
Okafor Zaza
It’d be an interesting start, but the questions would still be there in the need for front court depth, what to do with Jamal, and then whether Chill would return as SF to that team or if we need to acquire one.
I am not sure if the salaries work or not
I didn’t look it up, was just thinking out loud. My thinking is the Hornets would make anyone that gets Paul take Okafor. Would be contingent on them blowing everything up. Probably not likely this off season but could possibly be an option for next if they don’t trade Collison. Again just idle speculation.
What do you think about the idea of an Okafor and Al tandom? We would have a big question mark at the small forward position.
http://www.peachtreehoops.com/
I don't think much of Okafor...
not bad, but not good either. Not really a big athlete, not a scorer, not a great rebounder or shot blocker. Not bad in any area I don’t think, but not good either and certainly not worth his contract imo. But he would allow Al to play PF, would be less spectacular but more consistent Smoove (that is if Okafor is healthy). Like you allude to at the end though, I think we’d need a pretty good SF, and of course improved backups at SF, PF, and C (with Okafor’s injury history, we’d definitely want someone other than Zaza as the first big off the bench).
Glad to know that the media is helping the Hawks out with managing Joe and Tellem's
expectations.
The ideal situation here is to get a sign-and-trade deal done with a Western conference team, get back a couple of expiring contracts and hope that next season goes badly enough to get a top-10 draft pick.
There are only two ways that this will work-Joe takes the deal that Atlanta offered before last season, or a sign-and-trade.
Allowing Joe to go somewhere without getting anything in return would be disastrous, as would signing him to a max deal.
I would love to do a sign-and-trade with Dallas and try to use an expiring contract or two to package with Josh Smith and go after Chris Paul.
My greatest concern is that Josh is allowed to become the Alpha-Dog on this team next year without Joe around, and that Drew will have no control. A team with Josh as the “leader” and Jamal Crawford as a starter, as well as a rookie head coach is a recipe for a 30 win season, and lots of infighting amongst the team.
Two things.
First, I really think Joe’s impact on this team’s winning is very overblown at this time. His impact on the offense is a bigger issue, but his impact on winning isn’t. The fact is, the Hawks are almost 2 points better defensively when Joe isn’t on the floor. I know some of you don’t like to look at win shares or wins produced, two different stats. Taking win shares into account, the production Joe gives the team accounted for 8 wins last year. Both Al Horford and Josh Smith accounted for more wins based on win shares, with Al producing 11 wins and Josh producing 9 wins.
Take away the 8 wins that Joe produces based on win shares, and this is still a 45 win team if you don’t take into account that Al and Josh still have plenty of room to improve.
http://soaringdownsouth.com/
Second,
…if they do sign him to a max deal, then they have to make another deal to push this team over the top NOW. Joe’s deal will keep the Hawks from having the cap flexibility down the road to make needed improvements, so they have to make another move that puts them squarely in the championship talk now.
http://soaringdownsouth.com/
Joe is a third option on what team???
I may understand him being a second option to Lebron or Dwayne or Kobe. But third on what team put together now? The Lakers? And that’s it?
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
Look a max contract can be bad for any team
whom doesn’t have cap space, no matter who the player is. It doesn’t matter how much people don’t like Joe for not being emotionally accessible, or because “he disappears” during the playoffs when everyone else on the team disappears as well, or because people don’t think of him as a max player, or because he said something about the fans that was taken out of context. The truth is Joe deserves to get paid like everyone else who are free agents whom haven’t won anything yet either. Now, if everyone’s arguement is that having a max player period is bad for the franchise then that would give credence to those who view this site, thinking that there’s nothing but negativity going on here.
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
It does not have to just be a max contract
go look at what Shawn Marion is getting paid. He still has 3 years left of getting paid and he is nothing more than a 9th man now.
Unfortunately, the NBA has the absolute worst salary system of any of the professional leagues(that is why over half the teams are in the red right now). The easiest way for a franchise to destroy itself is to give a contract to ANYONE over 3 years, especially a guy who has been in the top 10 of minutes played for the last 7 consecutive years.
Joe will continue to be very good player, but the Hawks will be tied to mediocrity for the next 6 years if they sign Joe to a max deal.
A max player, especially on a cash strapped team...
like the one owned by ASG, needs to truly be a max, difference making player. Wade, James, etc. That Joe has routinely disappeared in the playoffs, and has a whole lot of mileage on those tires from the last several years at an age when many at his position begin to have their production diminish, makes him not that kind of player. I don’t disagree that Joe has been an excellent player with the Hawks, their best player and well deserved focal point on both ends of the floor. But while he does “deserve to get paid” that doesn’t mean the Hawks should be the ones to pay him. A team willing to spend well into luxury tax (which the Hawks under ASG are not) and a team that is willing to spend for a championship now when the back end of the deal will seem like a huge burden, those are the ones who Joe can get paid by, and probably should be paid by. But that isn’t the Hawks.
by Mr. Sanchez on Jun 30, 2010 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Say the Bulls add Joe and Bosh alone to the current mix...
Rose 1, Bosh 2, Joe 3 (or Deng 3/4).
by Mr. Sanchez on Jun 30, 2010 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Rose would be the primary ball handler but not the primary scorer.
They would probably go through Bosh most of the time but, in the clutch who would they go to?
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
Again, the answer is Rose...
He put up over 20 per last year, led the team in FG attempts by a wide margin, averaging over 17 and a half per in the regular season and 25 per game in the playoffs. He’s their #1 in any scenario not adding Wade or James (and maybe even if James is added). In that scenario of signings (Bosh and Joe in Chicago) if in thee clutch, it’d probably be Rose with the ball, working a pick and pop/roll with Bosh and Joe waiting on a weakside wing should the D collapse on Rose/Bosh.
by Mr. Sanchez on Jun 30, 2010 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
that's 20 points per game...
and shot attempts at 17.6 per game in the regular season, while taking 125 shot attempts in 5 playoff games (25 per).
by Mr. Sanchez on Jun 30, 2010 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
O Dear Lord...
Please leave Joe……..please……don’t we already have an Grrreat SG in Jamal….and dont we have another great SG(WITH THE SAME LAST NAME) in the making sitting right behind him!!!??!?!!! i just dont get it….I WISH WE COULD GET CHRIS KAMAN FOR JOE :) WE NEED A CENTER!!!!!!!
I agree with most
Get rid of Josh Smith and Iso Joe and get Rudy Gay free-of-Charge and Chris Paul from the Joe & Josh trade. Finally, get a decent Center. Even if we only have 30 wins, it will be a respectable team rather than a fractured, decent going down team.
This is the year of Marvin Williams!!!
yeah I said it, I hope that he will finally break through
So throwed that Randy Moss jumpin up couldn't even catch it
I've been saying this all year
I hope he’s not reading this and instead is at the gym working on his game
It's inevitable
Yahoo sports is reporting Hawks will offer Joe a max contract. Unless we sign and trade him for Dirk Nowitzki and Brendan Heywood, I don’t see any positive coming out of this
I wonder if Hawks players read this (and any other) blog...
Totally off subject… but an interesting thought.
Joe is a Beast
Al is a Beast
Smoove is a MONSTER!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
