Josh Smith anyone?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Blazinaway

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2010
Messages
11,091
Likes
4,378
Points
113
Apparently he is being shopped. I would consider this if we decided to play LMA at C, however one issue would be who we trade and if we kept Wallace would our outside shooting at PF and SF be too weak? Perhaps trade Wallace and change for Smith and keep Batum?
 
I would acquire Smith simply because he upgrades the team's future, even if the fit (shooting-wise) isn't ideal in the short term. A lineup of Miller, Matthews, Wallace, Smith and Aldridge would be really nice defensively and offensively, but it would have a severe lack of perimeter shooting. However, Miller is not a long-term piece, so the team can attempt to upgrade the shooting at that position when they work on acquiring a long-term replacement for Miller.

If Oden does return, that would give Portland a number of really good players: Oden, Aldridge, Wallace, Smith. One of them could be dealt (possibly with other filler) for a good young point guard, hopefully.

Ultimately, it depends on the price. If he can be had cheaply in return for also taking Joe Johnson's contract off their hands, I'd be very interested (I also like Johnson as a player, even if I don't like his contract).
 
Ultimately, it depends on the price. If he can be had cheaply in return for also taking Joe Johnson's contract off their hands, I'd be very interested (I also like Johnson as a player, even if I don't like his contract).

I wonder if there is any way to get Joe Johnson as a Roy replacement. Even with amnesty it makes no sense financially for Atlanta to take Roy in trade. Matthews and ??? for Johnson? It would take a lot of salary to balance it out. Throw in Smith and we wouldn't have any roster left.
 
Miller, Camby, & Matthews for Johnson & Smith? Yeah, right...but I can dream, can't I?
 
yeah we could even swing it without miller or wes, but we would have to add the farm (rudy/batum/elliot/babbitt) to make the salaries work
 
He sure played well against us this year. Other years not so much. He is awesome in the open court. Don't see how he would fit in if we had Oden. Big "If" I know. Too similar to Wallace IMO, in what he brings to a team.

But if we had no center but LMA, then sure why not. A LMA, Wallace and Smith front line? It could be fun.
 
:lol:

well the chatter is they are eager to get out of the money owed those two, thats where im coming from....that does happen occasionally you know...
 
Why the hell would Atlanta want to trade Smith?

There is no link to this rumor... so I have no reason to believe its valid.
 
The one link mentions ATL wanting Garnett and Allen from Boston. Boston should jump on that! Smith and Rondo is a damn good foundation to build on!
 
:lol:

well the chatter is they are eager to get out of the money owed those two, thats where im coming from....that does happen occasionally you know...

Yeh, it does happen; we got Gerald Wallace for a couple low draft picks and Cunningham. The economy has been bad for several years now; there are some owners who have never been in the black; that's why they are working to limit player salaries. There may be an amnesty clause but they are still going to have to pay the salary, no way are the players giving up salary that has already been contracted for, There are teams out there with players with big unwarranted salaries; Washington (Rashard Lewis), Golden State (Biedrins) are the first couple I can think of, sure there are more. Johnson's salary is out of line for what he gives but he is still an above average player so this deal for Portland might be the best. For teams that want to save the most money, the best deal is to trade for Miller before his option year has to be exercised; so hopefully Portland is busy. If PA really wants to win now, Portland needs to do something big in the next ten days. I hope they have somebody on staff who has the vision to line up a trade and the guts to suggest it to Allen.
 
cant trade miller until his option is picked up i believe, or else he would be expiring and unable to be traded due to the trade deadline
 
cant trade miller until his option is picked up i believe, or else he would be expiring and unable to be traded due to the trade deadline

Not an option per se, but a non-guaranteed final year; difference being he's still tradeable now but could be waived by receiving team before 6/30 and come off the books immediately.
 
The one link mentions ATL wanting Garnett and Allen from Boston. Boston should jump on that! Smith and Rondo is a damn good foundation to build on!

As long as they surrond them with smart individuals who can hit an outside shot. Like a younger version of Allen, Pierce, and Garnett.
Smith and Rondo together would need a strong leader to play with.
 
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q70

88. When can't a player be traded? Can players be given "no-trade" clauses in their contracts?

A "no-trade" clause can be negotiated into an individual contract if the player has been in the NBA for at least eight seasons, and has played for the team with which he is signing for at least four seasons. They don't have to be the immediately prior four seasons -- for example, Horace Grant got a no-trade clause from Orlando when he signed with them in 2001. He had played for Orlando for four seasons, but had played for Seattle and Los Angeles in the interim. Very few players actually have one of these no-trade provisions. Otherwise, individually negotiated contracts may not contain no-trade clauses. The no-trade clause prevents the team from making a trade involving the player without the player's consent.

In addition, teams cannot trade players under the following circumstances:

For two months after receiving the player in trade or claiming him off waivers, if the player's salary is aggregated with the salaries of other players. However, the team is free to trade the player either by himself (not packaged with other players), or without combining his salary with other salaries to acquire a more expensive player, immediately. This restriction applies only to teams over the salary cap. (Also see question number 75.)
When the trading deadline has passed. Teams are free to make trades again once their season has ended, but cannot trade players whose contracts are ending or could end due to an option or ETO.


i always read this to mean cases like millers...
 
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q70


i always read this to mean cases like millers...

Miller's contract isn't considered "due to end" since it has another year, and his last year isn't an option, so doesn't qualify that way either. An unguaranteed year is considered like any other year for cap considerations, it's just that the team can choose to walk away from it. The subtle functional difference is that an option requires an action (picking it up) to keep the player, while an unguaranteed year requires an action (cutting the player) to lose the player.
 
Miller and Wallace for Smith and Hinrich could work from a salary perspective, although who knows if that would meet the Hawk's requirements for the deal.
 
Miller's contract isn't considered "due to end" since it has another year, and his last year isn't an option, so doesn't qualify that way either. An unguaranteed year is considered like any other year for cap considerations, it's just that the team can choose to walk away from it. The subtle functional difference is that an option requires an action (picking it up) to keep the player, while an unguaranteed year requires an action (cutting the player) to lose the player.

ahh my bad thought it was an option, thats legit
 
First, S2 has it's own salaries page, and it's better than hoopshype, because it's based on StoryTeller's data. http://sportstwo.com/s2/NBASalaries.php

Second, Camby/Miller/Matthews is enough for Johnson/Smith (salary-wise), either this year or next year.

According to Storyteller's numbers for 2011, Camby + Miller + Matthews = $25,099,430. Johnson + Smith = $30,683,900.

That is within 16-17% or so. Is that close enough under the rules? If not, as other responders have said, more filler is needed on our side. That could probably be done. Would Atlanta do that to save ~8 million on Miller next year and ~11 million on Camby the year after that? Perhaps Camby would retire and they would save 19 Million for next year.

They'd have to be really hurting financially to rip their team apart like that. Perhaps they are.
 
According to Storyteller's numbers for 2011, Camby + Miller + Matthews = $25,099,430. Johnson + Smith = $30,683,900.

That is within 16-17% or so. Is that close enough under the rules?

Rules say incoming salaries must be no more than 125% + 100K of outgoing. 125% of 25,099,430 = 31,374,287.50. So yes, it's enough (salary-wise).

Would Atlanta do that to save ~8 million on Miller next year and ~11 million on Camby the year after that? Perhaps Camby would retire and they would save 19 Million for next year.

They'd have to be really hurting financially to rip their team apart like that. Perhaps they are.

Personally, I doubt they'd do it (hence my "I can dream, can't I?" comment). If they did, however, they'd be saving about $17M next year alone (if they waived Miller), and about $86M in overall contract value. That's enough to make any owner at least think about it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top