Atlanta Hawks Roster: Deadline Passes For Players With Non-Guaranteed Deals

by Kris Willis on Feb 8, 2012 8:01 AM EST

ATLANTA, GA - FEBRUARY 02: Jannero Pargo #7 and Vladimir Radmanovic #77 of the Atlanta Hawks battle for a rebound against the Memphis Grizzlies at Philips Arena on February 2, 2012 in Atlanta, Georgia. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement. (Photo by Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images)

The deadline passed Tuesday evening with no moves from the Atlanta Hawks so the contracts of power forward Ivan Johnson, point guard Jannero Pargo and shooting guard Jerry Stackhouse have been guaranteed for the remainder of the season. Players on non-guaranteed deals needed to be waived by the close of business on Tuesday to clear waivers in time for the February 10 deadline.

Ivan Johnson was clearly the safest bet especially given his current situation as the team's backup center. Pargo and Stackhouse may see sporadic playing time but provide insurance should the team suffer another injury.

This development really doesn't affect the Hawks search for potential 10-day contract candidates. Atlanta currently has one open roster spot with 14 players currently under contract. Perhaps one reason they have not acted thus far was the team was waiting to see who would get released this week with other teams shedding non-guaranteed players.

The possibilities aren't exactly encouraging but guys like Solomon Jones of the Clippers, the Lakers' Derrick Caracter and Washington's Hamady N'Diaye were some of the players cut on Tuesday.

For more on the Atlanta Hawks check out SB Nation Atlanta, follow Jason Walker and Kris Willis, along with Peachtree Hoops on Twitter and check out the Peachtree Hoops Facebook Fan Page.

Tweet Comment 26 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

love this piece...

never consider that we could be playing the waiting game…N’Dyie(spelling) maybe a decent pickup if we are interested….I will admit if something good comes outta this,Sund will have my forgiveness (IF we can get a serviceable big)

"I'm on 1"

by I am usually right except when... on Feb 8, 2012 8:45 AM EST via mobile reply actions

If Pargo is still on this roster...

Kirk must be on the trading block.

by Rufus1 on Feb 8, 2012 9:28 AM EST reply actions

What makes you think that

Jamal’s contract last season should have been a valuable piece at the deadline last season and the Hawks never once entertained calls for him.

@Kris_Willis
+Kris Willis
facebook.com/krisawillis

by Kris Willis on Feb 8, 2012 9:57 AM EST up reply actions

If Kirk isn't on the trading block then....

they know Al will be back for the playoffs or they have given-up on the season or Josh/Marvin is on the trading block….Because we need more size.

by Rufus1 on Feb 8, 2012 12:46 PM EST up reply actions

Last year they didnt need a big as much as now.

Plus the bench wasnt as strong as now. An the bench plays better without kirk in there.Last year jamal was our whole bench.

by SmokedTooMuch013 on Feb 8, 2012 1:15 PM EST up reply actions

That is true

Good points but I am still not convinced that there is a move to be made but we will find out shortly.

@Kris_Willis
+Kris Willis
facebook.com/krisawillis

by Kris Willis on Feb 8, 2012 1:53 PM EST up reply actions

Not necessarily. Some players cant be moved in this condensed season until March 1st.

sf Josh Smith + PF Troy Murphy/PF Jon Leuer/PF Motiejunas > tweener Josh Smith + tweener Marvin Williams
----
* {#40 Pick Perimeter F Jon Leuer is better than Marvin Williams and Hinrich cost us the pick}

by PointGuardSlim on Feb 8, 2012 2:43 PM EST up reply actions

agree

I think there is a move to be made for sure – I’m all in on Kirk being worthy of a 1st round pick or a big (not sure who that is – I understand that that’s voodoo right now), but if we can get that – he can go. If not, we just ride it out.

Hawk Str8Talk

by Hawk Str8Talk on Feb 8, 2012 11:38 PM EST up reply actions

The difference could be the luxury tax situation

Last year I thought they would let Jamal walk to save the money against the cap this year. If they trade Kirk it might not be a an attempt to improve the roster it might be solely financial move. The Lakers and Pacers are two teams with weak backcourt depth that might be interested in Kirk and have either cap room or an exception to acquire him. Personally I think it will depend on how competitive the ownership feels the team is at the end of February as to whether they do anything before the trade deadline.

by Evil Dallas on Feb 8, 2012 1:58 PM EST up reply actions

sooooooooo what does it mean with Stackhouse still on the roster?

"I'm on 1"

by I am usually right except when... on Feb 8, 2012 9:58 AM EST via mobile up reply actions

Interesting question

And how much is he paid? Could that money not have gone towards paying for a center?

I find it very interesting that ASG and Sund are ok with keeping Stackhouse around, when they don’t want to pay luxury tax. I don’t know what Stackhouse contributes to this team, that our coaching staff could not

by ATLpaul on Feb 8, 2012 11:55 AM EST up reply actions

Hes part of the coaching staff i think, a player/coach

by SmokedTooMuch013 on Feb 8, 2012 1:18 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

He's making $1.4 million

If I’m correct, half of that is paid by the league, to encourage teams to sign aging veterans. But the full $1.4 counts against the cap.

What does that mean towards adding a center? Not very much. It’s not like we were going to clear enough salary to be able to take on a MLE player, or anything like that. But it’s definitely a ton of money to be paid by an ownership group that pinches pennies routinely, considering he’s making more money this season than I have yet to earn in my lifetime, and he’ll play less than 200 minutes.

Braves will be fine. I'm not worried.

by Bronn on Sep 18, 2011 4:26 PM EDT

by Bronn on Feb 8, 2012 2:09 PM EST up reply actions

Good stuff

Thanks for providing this info

by ATLpaul on Feb 8, 2012 2:27 PM EST up reply actions

All minimum salary players count at the 2nd year veteran price that is toward the cap and luxury tax.

If it wasn’t that way the union could rightfully argue that it deters the signing of vets because the cap calculation is as important as the money outlay itself.

http://www.storytellerscontracts.info/resources/Atlanta.htm

However according to this page:
http://blog.shamsports.com/2012/01/creative-financing-in-nba-2011.html

Ivan Johnson counts as $854389 in luxury tax terms. Which may be why some sites show the Hawks as tax payers and others do not. I’m not sure who’s right, but it’s close either way.

by Evil Dallas on Feb 8, 2012 4:39 PM EST up reply actions