Challenge for JAE

Jae...

Its a horrible trap where you concede that bringing Josh Smith will be the save all plan to bring the Warriors back to the playoffs instantly, causing us to IMMEDIATELY jump over teams like the Blazers, the Hornets and the Jazz to become “contenders” in the Western Conference.

Of course there are numerous trade scenarios where Josh Smith would be able to come to the Warriors, it would all depend on how much he would want to be here. Only Smith and the Warriors would be able to determine that. From there, the pieces in a “Sign & Trade” would just have to match the salary that Smith would want. Tell me this, would you want to pay Smith more than Monta or less than Monta? Ellis is the highest paid player now, and is seemingly the cornerstone of this franchise. Seeing how the best player on the team should garner the highest salary, would you say that Smith is better and worth more to Chris Mullin and the Warriors than Monta?

by Mr. Monday Night on Jul 29, 2008 12:19 AM PDT reply actions

Tell me this, would you want to pay Smith more than Monta or less than Monta?

This is the only part I know for sure. Smith is worth more than Montay cause he’s a good big and Montaay is a good little. As to how to get Smith , I have no idea but how about Okafur instead? Montay and Dris for Felton and Okafur??

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 29, 2008 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions

that might be a horrible idea

by 3Kings650 on Jul 29, 2008 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions

That trade is not going to happen. Firstly, newly signed FA’s cannot be traded until Dec. Secondly, Monta, Andris (‘Dris makes me think too much about Stringer Bell and there’s just not much Stringer Bell in Biedrins), and Okafur signed are all in BYC territory. One is tough enough to trade. Three becomes ridiculously difficult.

On top of that, I think we lose out in talent, significantly.

by jae on Jul 29, 2008 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions

Why do people undervalue Monta's ability to score?

Especially one where he is driving to the rim at a ridiculous clip and much more effeciently than his counter parts in Wade & Iverson (his FG% is clearly evident of that). While he does not have the “court vision” needed to be the greatest point guard, he does have an adequate sense of where people need to be and has a great coach in Nellie to set up the offense to mask his lack of “court vision.”

That’s why we have Stephen Jackson and in a smaller sense Andris Biedrins. People still heavily underestimate his play from the high post, in particular his ability to run the pick & roll as well as initiate the offense from the top of the key utilizing a simple pass and cut. We’ve all seen it throughout the season, but it is rarely discussed. Oh well… Monta for All Star… 2009!

by Mr. Monday Night on Jul 29, 2008 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions

lol. thank you for this fanpost

this is really funny. i will not try to defend jae cuz he does a very good job of that on his own.

I challenge you to come up with a trade, whether it is with 2,3, or 4 teams that would bring JSmoove to the dubs w/ numbers that work.

thats really good. what would your numbers be?

i really enjoyed the stipulations that you put on the deal that was a good touch. i think what alot of people are losing sight of what the deal is called a sign and TRADE not a sign and GIVE. even if you came up with a number atl still has to agree on the compensation.

jae has actualy answered most of your questions and or points yesterday but you already knew that.

admins please dont delete this. it has alot of potential

by Rach on Jul 29, 2008 12:49 AM PDT reply actions

posted this in another thread, here ya go

8-player, 3-team deal:

MIN:
send McCants (2.6)
send Madsen (2.6)
send Carney (1.7)
OUTGOING TOTAL: 6.9

get Wright (2.6)
get Claxton (5.8)
INCOMING TOTAL: 8.4

ATL:
send Smith (9.7)
send Claxton (5.8)
OUTGOING TOTAL: 15.5

get Carney (1.7)
get McCants (2.6)
get Belinelli (1.5)
get Harrington (9.2)
INCOMING TOTAL: 15.6

GS:
send Wright (2.6)
send Belinelli (1.5)
send Harrington (9.2)
OUTGOING TOTAL: 13.3

get Smith (14)
get Madsen (2.6)
INCOMING TOTAL: 16.6

The incoming/outgoing totals need to be within 125% of eachother, so these all barely work.

Basically, Minny trades McCants for Wright’s upside but they take on Claxton’s bad contract but also get rid of Madsen’s slightly better but bad contract.

Atlanta gets out of Claxton’s ugly contract and get young Belinelli and Carney, as well a solid scorer in McCants. Harrington’s basically a big filler and almost expiring contract. Draft picks might need to go to ATL from GSW or MIN too to sweeten the pot.

GSW gets our ideal Nellieballer in Josh Smith at the cost of Wright’s upside, Bustinelli, and the TMNT. Oh, we’d also have take on Mark Madsen’s garbage for two years to make the numbers work.

JAE never gave confirmation that this would or wouldn’t work, but the numbers do work out.

by YaHeard on Jul 29, 2008 1:09 AM PDT reply actions

actually

in a salary cap FAQ I just read, Josh Smith’s BYC outgoing trade value would be 50% of his new contract, or in this case, about ~$7mil. So replacing that “send Smith (9.7)” with “send Smith (7)” under the ATL part, the outgoing and incoming salaries are still within 125% and the numbers still work.

by YaHeard on Jul 29, 2008 1:29 AM PDT up reply actions

No offense but....

NERD ALERT!!!

I’m bad at math. Sorry. Had to. Props to you though for the ability to crunch numbers.

I’d prefer Okafor.

by bucknall20 on Jul 29, 2008 1:37 AM PDT up reply actions

Don't know if you saw, but Okafor just agreed in principle to a 6 year $72 mm deal

by scwarrior24 on Jul 29, 2008 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions

Okafor is off the market.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/basketball/nba/07/29/bobcats.okafor.ap/index.html

by NBA on Jul 29, 2008 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions

so your sayin we still gotta chance

YES!!!

by Rach on Jul 29, 2008 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions

oh

and this all assumes that Josh Smith signs a frontloaded contract that goes something like 14/13/12/11/10, or 60mil/5yrs at $12m/yr.

by YaHeard on Jul 29, 2008 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions

Yea we've already seen this one though.. I want somethign else, make it interesting

by scwarrior24 on Jul 29, 2008 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions

I've seen Jae...

answer all your questions ad nauseam.

Everyone would love to see Josh Smith in a Warriors uniform, but it’s a pipe dream.

by kinetic on Jul 29, 2008 1:37 AM PDT reply actions

Is this the catch-all JAE diary?

If so, I have a request for Jeppaleppalalalalala: a few weeks ago you made a hilarious quip to someone involving a poster’s mother and JAE. I was thinking of using it as my new sig quote now that ^^^^ has been signed (huzzah!) If you could track it down for me, I would greatly appreciate it.

And while I’m at it: thanks, JAE, for keeping up the signal-to-noise ratio here relatively high amid the influx of new voices (some of them brilliant, some not so much). In the early days of GSoM, we sometimes had to wait days on end to be graced by a nugget of your wisdom; now we seem to get a few per day. Obviously we’re all better off for your constant presence here (even if your current employer isn’t, necessarily…) ;-)

Sign ^^^^ !!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 29, 2008 6:33 AM PDT reply actions

I don't mess with Jae...

He listens to 50 Cent and read Jim Starlin and Ron Lim’s Infinity Gauntlet from Marvel Comics.

:-P

by Tony.psd on Jul 29, 2008 6:56 AM PDT up reply actions

My present ‘employment’ is rather, uh, ‘sporadic’.

by jae on Jul 29, 2008 8:37 AM PDT up reply actions

Aha. I've been there.

Around the time I discovered GSoM, uncoincidentally… ;-)

Anyway, enjoy it while it lasts. And if it lasts longer than you’d like, and/or if the Republicans stay in power: expatriate. You can watch hoops and blog to your heart’s content from a hammock in Tahiti…

Sign ^^^^ !!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 29, 2008 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions

So here’s my position on a Smith trade. It’s a combination of “he’s not as good as people are making him out to be” and “the deal will be difficult.” Both together mean that it’s time to end the fantasy until there’s something substantial to go on.

I think Smith is a good player. Really. I think he could help this team. I think he could help most teams. I’m not one who thinks that the “style” or “system” is nearly as important as the quality of the player, but Smith seems to be a good stylistic fit as well.

However, what I’ve read about him from posters doesn’t ring true to what he actually is. Those who think he’s going to to solidify the power forward spot will be disappointed. His shooting and scoring are not like that of a power forward. He is not a high percentage scorer. He misses shots at a rate unacceptable for your PF by taking too many jumpers that he’s really just OK [or worse] at because his actual post game isn’t really an effective weapon. It would not be an offensive upgrade from Harrington in many, many ways [and y’all should know what I think of Harrington by now]. He’s also not a rebounding ‘beast.’ He’s a good rebounder as a 3, but strictly run of the mill for a 4, if not a bit worse. He’s better than Harrington in this regard, a little bit better. About a rebound a game in equal PT better, which is something, but, it’s not beastly. HIs build doesn’t suggest beastly PF either. I think it’s that we’re not as familiar with him every day (similar to the case before Harrington got here) so we imagine him to be what we want him to be, not what he is.

What he is is an electric athlete who gives you coverage at both forward spots and, by all accounts, solidifies defense. He blocks shots like Kirilenko, rebounds the position well enough and bugs the crap out of the opposition. And the stats back up that he really is that much of a defensive presence, enough so to counteract his not so impressive offense.

With a better coach who focused on offense, he’d probably improve his o-side numbers. Would he do that while still being focused (or having a structure of the game) that allows him to maintain his effect on D? I dunno. What I do know is that he came into the league as a 45% shooting COMBO forward with some guard skills, who got about 8 rebounds/36 and could block shots like a center. 4 years later and he’s statistically ridiculously similar. He’s improved some, but it’s not suggesting that he’s on a meteoric rise, that he’s ready to blow up. It suggests to me that more likely, what you see is what you get, and what you get is a pretty good player, but not a great one.

To paraphrase the great, wise Carlton D. Ridenhour, do not, under any circumstances, believe the hype.

So while he’s a good player, a max contract for him would be INSANELY stupid. Sure, he could develop some more, but banking on someone growing into their salary almost never works (see: Dunleavy, M. Jr.; Thomas, T.).

Would I pay him something starting in the $8-9mil range? Yeah, probably. (and anything lower is a no-brainer.) He’s young, so at least you know you’ll be paying him through peak. But that’s it. If it took more than that, I’d stay away. I just don’t think he’s worth that now and I would not bank on him improving enough to justify a bigger salary after the fact.

So with that in mind, what does that leave us? Let’s just suppose the midpoint of the range, starting at $8.5 mil, which would work out to about the same contract that Biedrins just got, FWIW, similar to Monta’s. I don’t believe that Smith has demonstrated that he’s worth more than either of our guys. i know others disagree. I’ve got numbers to back this, but they’d take too long to explain in this already lengthy post and my guess is that people who accept that I’ve probably got good reason don’t need it spelled out and people who just believe Smith is better than our guys won’t care that the numbers indicate that such a belief is indicative of a psychosis that they are presently experiencing and will reject stats in the standard mathphobic ‘you can show anything with stats’ ridiculousness or some variant about how basketball is different blah blah blah [which translates, roughtly, into ‘my armchair talent evaluation is better than published, academic peer reviewed models and models NBA clubs pay substantial dollars to develop and utilize to gain advantages in a multiple billion dollar industry.’]

Challenge #1: get Smith to accept that sort of salary.
Challenge #2: get ATL to believe that they have zero chance of keeping him at the same salary (as I believe they’d gladly pay that) because he hates it there so much that he’s willing to reject it in order to leave in a year as an unrestricted free agent.

OK, I don’t believe either of those two challenges can be met, but let’s just assume that they are. Now you need to make a deal happen. I’m sticking with two team deals because I don’t believe that these rumors have any legs, so why try to imagine a three way deal where we now have to please another party? It might make some salary issues easier, but until the challenges above are met (which I don’t think we’re close on) we’re just moving into imaginationland. And since I’m not prepared to fend off Manbearpig this morning, imaginationland with its Minnesota deal parts doesn’t really seem like it’s worth considering right now.

So here’s the situation:

ATL is over the cap, so they’re subject to his BYC value. This means that if they wanted to trade just him, they could bring back $5.4mil. We’d be acquiring the full $8.5mil though, so we’d have to clear out $6.72mil minimum to fit it in under the cap rules. This is not enough to fit in Harrington in the deal. So we’ve got to make it a deal involving other players. This is good from ATL’s view, because they’re short on players right now, so a deal bringing back more bodies than they send out is, good, but the problem is that they don’t have the space to fit those other guys because they’re only replacing Smith’s BYC value. But there’s still some possibilities.

OK, we can rule out some ATL players from consideration. Horford ain’t going anywhere. He’s great. I’d rather have him than Smith, but he ain’t available. I don’t think Marvin Williams is either. Bibby is too expensive from our end, ditto the grossly overrated Joe Johnson. This leaves Pachulia, Acie Law, and Claxton as the real trade fodder. There’s some possibiliies of low dollar sign and trade for Salim Stoudamire perhaps—I haven’t really looked into the contract status there, but I don’t see this helping enough to really consider this. No, we’ve got three ATL contracts to work with.

Obviously, Claxton is the guy they’d want to part with. He makes the most and does the least. But to fit his contract in we’d have to send somemthing else too. Wright’s salary actually makes everything kosher. But just Wright. Belinelli doesn’t work in the deal then, but then again, I don’t see why they’d want him, save their need for warm bodies. If they’re into warm bodies, it’s Randolph and Belinelli instead of Wright.

Would I trade Wright and Harrington for Claxton and Smith? Yeah, if Smith started at $8.5mil. Would I sub out Randolph and Marco for Wright and make the deal? Absolutely. I’m more up on Wright than many here but his value is still potential more than anything else. Randolph has looked like an amazing talent, but I haven’t been swayed by a few summer league games. He had big holes in his game at LSU. There’s a reason why he went late lottery. He’s a bigger risk than Wright (and I’m not sure that he’s much bigger “upside” in return).

So that’s it. Simple. Just convince ATL to give up on keeping Smith, convince them that they want Harrington back on a two year rental and that Wright or Beli/Randolph gives them potential (maybe toss in picks) to make up for that while they return to the cellar and hope for the best with the “potential” of the guy(s) we sent. Now convince them that the riots among their three remaining fans for giving up the popular Smith for a player (Harrington) they’d once soured on who came in once before and showed himself to be worth zero wins a year wouldn’t do more damage to the franchise than it’s worth. Can you do that?

But again, this means getting Smith to agree to a contract that will average about $10mil a year to play here and getting ATL to believe that they cannot keep him for the same deal. Could that happen? Sure. But I doubt it. I think Smith wants more and believes he can get more since he turned down a similar sized extension last year. Obviously, things change, but I see the cards stacked against it.

Now people are free to believe that he’s worth more than that (they’d be wrong, but they’re free to be wrong and I’ll do my best to constantly remind them of it lest they forget). And if he does get a bigger offer, more things open up, but not a lot more. Most of what happens at that point is just that we can give away more talent to put a bigger, unjustifiably large chunk of our budget in front of Smith. It won’t help ATL get much more talent back, which means they’re not really going to be more interested.

Did that help?

by jae on Jul 29, 2008 9:53 AM PDT reply actions

+1

exciting player but asking way too much. not worth it. u r right on the spot about rather having horford over smith. j-smoove as u guys refer him to reminds me of dominique wilkens or a vince carter type of player. electrifying as hell, but lacking the leadership and competive nature to win a championship. watching that series against the hawks and celtics, i was much more amazed about horford’s performance than smith. smith had some crazy dunks, but i am satisfied with crazy dunks at the Slam Dunk Contest. i want a CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!!!!

by nuttinbutnet on Jul 29, 2008 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions

So....

You’re saying that anything’s possible if we include a 3rd team??!

Memphis has cap space, right?

Why don’t we ship Al to ATL, they can send us JSmith and Memphis can take Claxton (cuz they need more PGs), and Memphis can send a pick to ATL. Ball game!

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 29, 2008 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions

Thanks for the input

I personally think he is worth $12mm per, but I guess tahts just a matter of opinion. I appreciate the amount of thought you put into it, but I was hoping you did feel like taking on manbearpig this morning… haha. Maybe someone else will.

I just read an article that said "The Hawks have a multi-year offer on the table for Smith that is pushing $60 million, according to a source. Smith's camp is hoping to find something better in a sign-and-trade and may very well drag out the impasse all the way through September, as the agents for Luol Deng and Ben Gordon did last season. "

http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/basketball/nba/blog/2008/07/morning_roundup_1.html

So who knows, maybe they could get that desperate and the elements could align and four teams could come together to bring J smoove to the dubs…like JP in angels in the outfield said, “hey…it could happen”

by scwarrior24 on Jul 29, 2008 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions

I’m curious what the real arguments are for why he’s worth that much.

Here’s the arguments against:

1) He isn’t a high percentage shooter. If he shoots enough to score respectably, he will miss many shots, thus killing possessions. His scoring is of the guard variety, so it doesn’t really open things up for other players.
2) He is not a rebounding force. He is acceptable. Acceptable should not command the highest salary on your team unless you plan to suck.
3) His trajectory hasn’t been sky’s the limit upward (and there’s some issues with him getting along with management).

What screams $12mil?

by jae on Jul 29, 2008 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions

Well, how 'bout this:

Rashard Quovon Lewis
Age at time of signing: almost 28
Career #s (per 36 minutes): 46% fg, 6.0 reb, 1.9 ast, 0.6 blk, 3.7 fta
Playoff numbers: same (slightly worse)
Contract: 6 years, $110-120M (estimated)

Not really an argument, but a market-stretcher for guys like JSmooth.

(Imagine having to deal with a front line of Turkoglu/Howard/JSmooth? What a bunch of doofuses the Magic are…)

Sign ^^^^ !!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 29, 2008 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions

Imagine having to deal with a front line of Turkoglu/Howard/JSmooth AND Lewis

Seriously, from what I hear, they could have given Lewis something like 75M/6 years and still got away with it. That’d leave enough cap room to do stuff with.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 29, 2008 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions

I understand what you are saying

and it is clear that this offseason is much different than those in the past. The market has changed and rashard lewis caliber players are no longer making 20mm per.

This changeis partly the result of having very few teams with cap room, but hopefully its the also partly a real market correction where GMs are realizing the value of the players in this league.

Whatever the reason, the result is that players like monta, biedrins, okafor are signing for around 9-12mm per, when in past years they might have received much more.

For this years market, 12mm is a lot, but what im saying is that for a 22 year old freak athlete that can play the 4, 12mm isnt that much, especially compared to past years.

For us an ideal four woudl be a big body that can play defense, rebound, run the break, w/ a good outside shot, and a postup game…lol but i think that is everyones ideal four. We can wait forever for that, but those don’t come around very often.

I’m going to address your arguments:

1) Ok he isn’t a high % shooter and his scoring is “of the guard variety”. But, you are forgetting that in our offense, he is athletic enough to run the break and therefore will take higher percentage shots. There are lots of refinements that can be made to his offensive game, but i’m willing to take that gamble, considering hes only 22.

2) Although he may not be a rebounding force, in the last two years he averaged 8.5 boards per, in 36 mins. vs. al who over his career has averaged about 7 board/36 mins. Now also, in our system, there are far more shots taken and therefore far more rebounds to be had so I would think that Jsmooves rebounding numbers would imrove in our offense.

Josh Smith may not be a huge body we would ideally want at the 4, but he is as strong as Al, more athletic than Al, and statistically a better rebounder than Al. With Josh as our strong freak athlete four, and biedrins as a long athletic 5, i think our rebounding combination would greatly improve, especially since they both can also run the break.

3) Just because his numbers havent improved taht dramatically in his four years in the league do not mean he wont improve. His scoring, shooting %, steals, assists, and boards have all improved although not dramatically jsut about every year, and he is still 22.

If you think about it, swapping JSmoove for Al really does makes a huge difference in terms of possessions. Jsmoove got almost 1.8 more boards/36 than Al last year. He also got 0.6 more steals and almost 2.6 more blocks than Al. Thats 5 potential extra possessions per game, which for our team could be crucial.

Plus, with baron gone, our only real highlight reel type of guy is monta (and someday randy). I can’t imagine anything that would get our crowd going more than Jsmoove swatting someone, running the break and finishing with authority at the other end.

Finally, at 22 Jsmoove is at the perfect age to mature with our team.

He may not have the ideal post game or outside shot, but he does provide a lot that we dont have and that we won’t be getting anytime soon barring a miracle. He is also young enough to develop these thigns, and hey, maybe he never will. All i know is that had he stayed in college this would be his rookie year, and I feel pretty confident that he will do some serious growing as a player in the next few years.

I think the price we got biedrins at was a steal and I like what we payed monta, but lets be honest, guards are much easier to find then big men. Josh Smith would work very well in our system and I woudl definitely be willing to pay him 12mm per, especially since I think the price of this kind of young/talented big man will increase dramatically in the next few offseasons.

by scwarrior24 on Jul 29, 2008 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions

Josh Smith would work very well in our system and I woudl definitely be willing to pay him 12mm per,

Great arguments, you convinced me. I’m willing to trade Montay for him straight up. Marcus will hafta play the point but what the hell?

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 29, 2008 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions

That would leave an ALL-LEFTY starting lineup...

1 Williams
2 Rudolph
3 JSmooth
4 BWright
5 Biedrins

The Mullin master plan finally comes together!

Sign ^^^^ !!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 29, 2008 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions

ALL-LEFTY starting lineup...

Those leftys should be very creative, probably wouldn’t even need a coach.

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 29, 2008 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions

Wait a minute!

how did Rudolph sneak in there. Back to D league young man!

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 29, 2008 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions

How did he sneak in?

Easy: he put one of those black plastic cap thingies on his nose. Makes him talk kinda funny, but works like a charm.

I actually really like that team. Not next year, but in about 2010-11…

Now for today’s artwork:

Sign ^^^^ !!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 29, 2008 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions

Right back at cha'... NO NOSE JOB!

Everybody DOWHUTCHALIKE!

by Tony.psd on Jul 29, 2008 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions

My problem with all your arguments is that you’re paying for what you think a player will become. I think that this fails more often than not, that the rationalization for why x will be better in the future given circumstances y and z too often are shown, in hindsight, to be wrong. I think it’s overstated to pay him as if he was a top notch 4. He isn’t. He’s a combo forward who can play the 4 some, but works better when he’s given some discretion to move between roles performed by either forward.

I would not pay him based on what I thought his FG% could be, what I thought his rebounds could be. I have not said that because he hasn’t really improved in 4 years that he won’t improve, but banking on what he has done is much much safer, and, traditionally, much, much, much more likely to be correct than banking on him improving. I do not like to pay based on potential. The odds of it resulting in an overpaid player who never “matures” to justify the contract dwarf the number of guys who ever live up to the inflated contracts.

I would certainly not pay him simply because he’s better than Harrington. Harrington’s not very good. He’s grossly overpaid and as a benchmark of what a forward can do, he’s a lousy benchmark. Suggesting we pay Smith because he’s an upgrade over a guy who’s overpaid misses some real economic realities.

An important point: the value of a block is not necessarily a possession. The majority of blocks do not send the ball back the other way (and not all of them prevent what would otherwise have been made baskets). In general, a block is worth about a half a possession when you factor in that blocks usually correlate with some altered, non blocked misses and all that jazz. It is VERY unlikely that he’d be worth 5 changes of possession based on the blocks.

by jae on Jul 29, 2008 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions

Ok so hes worth 3.5 or 4 changes of possession

Plus you wouldn’t be paying him top notch 4 money. Top notch four money is the $23 mm paid to KG or 19mm to Tim Duncan. Hey we were all stoked to give elton brand 17mm per at 30 yrs old coming back from injury. Okafor and Bogut jsut got 12mm per year so I think to call that paying for a top notch pf is an exaggeration.

JSmoove would not be getting top notch 4 money, he’d be making just more than brad miller (10.6mm per year) and even though Jsmoove isn’t a top notch 4 yet, I think he has the potential to be one, especially in our small ball, fast break system.

We’d be paying a very good 22 year old four with loads of potential adn good fit for our system, above average starting pf money. And the only reason we can pull this off is because nobody has money to spend on him. I think at 11 or 12mm he’d be a steal.

by scwarrior24 on Jul 29, 2008 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions

Elton Brand has shown himself to be consistently more valuable than Smith. He’s the high percentage interior scoring option that teams have difficulty stopping even when they throw their forces at him. He’s also a superior rebounder and a good shot blocker. Smith is the better shot blocker. He’s not as good a player overall.

I’m again reading people describing Smith’s assets in terms of “potential.” I do not think paying for potential works out that often. I can think of many cases where it has backfired and a contract looks stupid and far, far fewer where it all worked out.

by jae on Jul 29, 2008 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions

But our deal for brand was $4-5 mm more

and brand is 30 and is just coming off or a serious injury, but you seem to ignore that. Brand (the last time he was healthy) was definitely a better player than Josh smith, but who knows how he’ll be this year or how many years he has left in him. You can say that paying for potential doesn’t work out that often, but it is a premium you have to pay for.

I think that at 12mm, we are paying a pretty small premium for a lot of potential reward. You always have to take potential into account just as you have to take age and health into account (just like we did with baron). I’m saying that 12mm is not what “top notch” pfs are being paid—top notch pfs are beign paid $15-$23mm (KG). We’d be getting a pretty good one for a price way cheaper than that.

12mm per, is middle of the road for a starting 4. The ONLY REASON we coudl even potentially get him that cheap is because there are no teams with money and everyone is waiting for 2010.

by scwarrior24 on Jul 29, 2008 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions

Actually "potential" is not a premium you have to pay for

That’s something you can work into incentive deals like we did with Beans. The “pay for potential” attitude is what got Mullin in trouble in the early ‘00s. Let’s not relive that again.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 30, 2008 7:13 AM PDT up reply actions

Josh Smith's FG %

As a conventional power forward, 45% is horrible.

But as a tweener forward with some guard skills and range out beyond the arc, I think 45% is acceptable. Sure he’s not a great shooter for distance, but he’s good enough that players need to respect it. In my mind, I see a defensive stud who has the ability to light a fire in his teammates and in the crowd with his highlight-reel-worthy blocks and dunks, who’s a better than average rebounder, and whose offensive game will not exactly hurt you. He was 48th last year in FGA’s on a team with no other offense besides Joe Johnson, he’s not exactly a chucker in the mold of Stephen Jackson or Ricky Davis. On our team he’d most likely be the 4th scoring option in our starting lineup. Whether he’s willing or not to accept that role is another topic altogether. I just think he’s getting too much criticism here for his 45% fg, where it wouldn’t even be much of a factor in our high powered offense.

by YaHeard on Jul 29, 2008 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions

45% is the NBA average for all players. It’s more or less what marks acceptable for a 2/3 type player. It’s acceptable if you have some other solution for getting your FG% up in an interior player, but if you’re slotting him in favor of another post player, you better have some big upside in the rest of his game.

No one else other than Johnson? You make it sound like they were having trouble scoring points. ATL was more or less dead middle of the pack.

Yes, on our team he wouldn’t be one of the primary offensive options, and as such, the FG% issue wouldn’t be so pronounced, but does a guy whose offense “will not exactly hurt you” and “wouldn’t even be much of a factor”, whose rebounding is “better than average” (something that’s conditionally true depending on what sort of position you see him playing) really worth $12mil as some seem to think? Is he really that good of a defender, because to justify that money, he better be as good a defender as Monta is on offense. Is he?

by jae on Jul 29, 2008 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions

counter

Is Smith’s defense better than Monta’s offense? That’s a tough call. I’ll concede that Josh Smith has never made an All-Defensive team before. Can’t argue that he doesn’t have the tools to be one in the future though.

But here’s my counter: Is Josh Smith’s offense any worse than Monta’s defense?

by YaHeard on Jul 29, 2008 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions

I think they’re pretty comparable (an opinion), which is why I asked about Smith’s defense. It’s rumored to be good and he’s got the block numbers, but I’d have to be very, very certain that it was as good as advertised to invest so heavily. I also suspect that much of Monta’s defensive woes aren’t inherent to him as a player and are something of a product of environment and expectations. I remember him getting after guys and showing signs that he could be a disruptor as a rookie. I remember others posting as much. He wasn’t immediately seen as a wholesale defensive liability.

The other market reality: offense is almost always over paid and overvalued. Trading a guy who lights up the board more often gets you back value than trading a guy whose production brings about the same improvement to the team’s record, but makes his contributions on the defensive end. In terms of the market, should you need to restructure, there will be fewer takers for the defensive ace.

The other perception reality: I don’t think people have a good grasp of what “average” defense is. I base this on the fact that in the much I read about players, far, far people seem to consider any specific player as “below average” than above average or even average. There’s also something I’ve noticed: the better a player is on offense, the more likely people are to be critical of his defense. I don’t think perception and reality are always in synch on defensive assessments. Still, that said, Monta didn’t really stop anyone last year. He wasn’t one of the better defenders on a team that wasn’t very good on defense.

by jae on Jul 29, 2008 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions

my biggest pet peave in sports journalism/fandom...

...is the rampant inability to determine a players ideal position. when we drafted robertson, media and fans alike were saying he somehow duplicated brendan wright’s skill set, presumably because they are both tall and skinny. they could not have more dissimilar games! one is obviously a sf, and the other equally as obviously a pf. in this case, we have a team almost entirely made of swingmen, and we’re clamoring to get another one! just because a player is taller than 6’7” and is a good shot blocker does not mean he is PF material! ARGH! seriously! AAAAAARGHHH!

I'm keen on the professional basketball club The Golden State Warriors. I don't fancy other clubs.

by The Bimbo Coles Experience on Jul 29, 2008 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions

I'll throw in a few other things

1. First and foremost, Josh Smith’s long-term NBA position is SF. It gives him more of a size advantage, takes him a little further out of the low block on O, and actually would probably work better defensively.

2. I agree strongly with jae about J-Smoove’s value being overinflated. He is a very talented guy, but he’s not the savior…yet. Also, his mental “issues” worry me a great deal.

3. The deal I would work on would be a little different that the ones proposed thus far. First of all, I just don’t see Atlanta having too much of an interest in Al. However, I do think that Steven Jackson would be a compelling piece in a Josh Smith trade, and that could end up being the difference.

The deal I’d work from: Josh Smith gets a slightly front-loaded deal (starts at 11.5m and averages slightly over $10m total- I’ll work the #’s later if desired)

Here’s how it shakes out:
Atlanta trades:
Josh Smith ($5.75m because it’s 1/2 of 11.5 thanks to BYC)
Speedy Claxton ($5.76m)
Marvin Williams ($5.6m)

Atlanta receives:
Stephen Jackson ($7.14m)
Hakim Warrick ($2.1m)
Javaris Crittenton ($1.3m)
Darko Milicic ($7m)

Total amount traded: $17.14m
Total amount received: $17.54m
Qualifies under rules (2.3% difference)

Memphis trades:
Hakim Warrick ($2.1m)
Javaris Crittenton ($1.3m)
Darko Milicic ($7m)
Antoine Walker ($9.3m)

Memphis receives:
Al Harrington ($9.2m)
Speedy Claxton ($5.76m)
Marvin Williams ($5.6m)
Marco Belinelli ($1.44m)

Total amount traded: $19.7m
Total amount received: $22m
Qualifies under rules (11.6% increase)

Golden State trades:
Stephen Jackson ($7.14m)
Al Harrington ($9.2m)
Marco Belinelli ($1.44m)

Golden State receives:
Josh Smith ($11.5m)
Antoine Walker ($9.3m)

Total amount traded: $17.78m
Total amount received: $20.8m
Qualifies under rules (16.9% increase)

Why for Atlanta: It gives them a ton more depth, gives them another potential PG in the future in former Georgia Tech player Javaris Crittenton, FINALLY gives them a C in Darko who can be paired with Horford, and gives them a running 4 in Warrick.

PG: Bibby / Acie Law IV / Javaris
SG: Joe Johnson /
SF: SJax /
PF: Horford / Warrick
C: Darko / Zaza

Why for Memphis: An increase in overall talent (and size, despite Darko) and some firepower off the bench. Also, it gives them a ton of flexibility in the 3-4-5 with Rudy Homosexual, Marvin, Harrington, and Marc Gasol (plus whoever they pick in the lotto this year- Blake Griffin?). Also, it helps ease their logjams and helps their long-term salary, which is nice.

PG: Conley / Kyle Lowry / Marko Jaric
SG: No-J Mayo / Marco Belinelli / Marko Jaric
SF: Rudy Gay / Marvin Williams
PF: Al Harrington / Marvin Williams / Darrell Arthur
C: Marc Gasol / Al Harrington

Why for the Warriors: They add the best player in the deal without giving up any long-term pieces. I love Jackson as much as the next guy, but Smith would be a stone-cold killer as a 3 in Nellieball who dabbles in the 4. Also, they actually cut long-term salary with Walker and his team option (and I’d cut him immediately after declining the team option officially), which makes adding a MLE piece next offseason more practical. There is still a hole at the 1/2, but that can be filled long-term by the next draft pick or free agency.

PG: Monta / Marcus Williams
SG: Maggette / Monta / Kelenna
SF: Josh Smith / Maggette / Randolph
PF: B. Wright / Josh Smith / Randolph / Hendrix
C: Beans / Turiaf / B. Wright

by dprodigy19 on Jul 29, 2008 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions

You're talking about a 3 team trade with 10 players including a S&T

Yeah, that qualifies as a pipe dream.

These things happen (rarely), but why exactly are you wasting your time figuring this out? And no, you can’t use the “well, why are you reading it” defense, because I just skimmed it enough to count the teams and number of players. Though I did notice Antoine in there…

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 29, 2008 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions

Wow, aren't we judgmental?

I did it because I can.

Maybe that’s why I have a blog that’s been linked to by ESPN and Yahoo and you don’t…

by dprodigy19 on Jul 29, 2008 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions

Where's Iggy? Are you Iggy?

Getting a little defensive are we?

I’m happy for you that your blog gets linked. Really, congrats. But appeasing the masses with pipe dreams, to me, is silly and a waste of time.

Though, I may have my panties in a bunch after reading endless Josh Smith trade rumors/scenarios that involve 17 teams and 52 players…

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 30, 2008 7:19 AM PDT up reply actions

I have a blog that’s been linked to by ESPN and Yahoo and you don’t…

What does that take? Money? Talent??, Bad luck???

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 30, 2008 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions

Thank you thank you thank you!

Well at $8.5 mil starting ($10 mil/yr avg, which would be less than Monta), I could swallow him coming to the Bay in exchange for Harrington & Wright/(Belinelli/Randolph). But, does he doesn’t drastically improve our team like everyone keeps thinking he will? I believe that he will marginally improve our team, but not to the extent of turning us into a “contender” or even a playoff contender.

Should he come here, he would be slated to be at the 4 position, especially seeing how we gave Maggette the best possible contract he could have gotten from any team in the league to play the 3. Then blah blah blah blah. This is great analysis.

by Mr. Monday Night on Jul 29, 2008 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions

Almost without a doubt he’s a big improvement over Harrington. I suspect he’s 4 or 5 wins over the season better than Harrington. That’s pretty big. Last year that’s certainly the difference between staying home and getting to play in the late spring.

I’m not as hung up on the position since dreadfully few lineups really use that 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 divisions for long stretchs so it’s more in terms of whose minutes he gets. If he got Harrington’s minutes, we’d be better, regardless of what position we chose to call it. He’s versatile, so I suspect that even another coach not so into the Nelson schemes would still find him effective, though a team hell bent on using him as prototype 4 or a prototype 3 will find aspects lacking. I’d use him in a manner similar to the way Kirilenko is used in Utah. They’re similar enough in what they do for you.

by jae on Jul 29, 2008 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions

4 or 5 wins this season would be huge

because although i dont think we’d be a contender yet, I think we’d make the playoffs considering the recent chagnes to the Western conference. The most important part of this is that we’d give our young guys playoff experience together.

Just Imagine 4 years from now when monta, jsmoove, and biedrins and marcus williams would be turning 26, and dependign on who we kept randolph would be turning 23, belinelli would be turning 26 or Bwright would be turning 25. If those guys got 4 years together and some playoff experience I definitely think theycould be dangerous in the postseason

by scwarrior24 on Jul 29, 2008 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions

He meant 4-5 wins with last years team.

I complete agree with Jae that if we had Smith over Harrington, we would be 4-5 wins better, but its not a simple case of trading Harrington for Smith straight up.

We’d have to give up some of our young guys as well as our salary flexibility to do so. In the long run, it wouldn’t be worth it to tie everything into Monta, Biedrins, Smith & Maggette, seeing how that would be the core of the team and would tie up approximately $45 mil/yr of salary for the next five years… that means less than $25 mil/yr for 9-11 spots on the roster. On average, that’s $2 mil per player. Now that’s not a problem now, but how about in a few years w/ Azubuike’s contract is up and we have to start digging for scrubs?

Long term is the biggest concern. If we didn’t sign Maggette to that big contract, I would be all for signing Smith with at 5 yrs, $50 mil, but its too late for that.

by Mr. Monday Night on Jul 29, 2008 5:18 PM PDT up reply actions

Umm can I just order..

the Cliffs Notes to this post, just playin.
Lot of reading plus lazy, so you know how it is.

by The Golden One on Jul 29, 2008 10:15 AM PDT reply actions

+1

by J2daZ on Jul 29, 2008 5:27 PM PDT up reply actions

Josh Smith is good but

has anyone thought of the idea of trading with chicago for luol deng? he can play in nellies system plus he can shoot and rebound plus his long arms can provide a pretty good shot blocker(at least hes better than harrington)what do you think would you rather have deng who is unhappy in chicago or harrington who nobody gives credit for and looks like he belongs in the dinosaur era!

by ceejayybreh on Jul 29, 2008 3:35 PM PDT reply actions

Please we already have 3 Deng's on the team!

by smearthebeard on Jul 29, 2008 6:40 PM PDT up reply actions

Give J-Smooth a break, would he improve our team, HELL YEAH HE WOULD

and if we could get it done for bwright and AL, I am in, To have the chance to watch that group of talented guys mature together, cap space increases every year, plus the MLE, filling out our team would work, keep drafting right and don’t overpay for bench talent and we could contend for years to come, do I believe J-Smooth would make the difference between playoffs and not, ya probably, maybe even getting into 2nd or 3rd round, I do not think there is a team that could keep up with these guys running, especially if we have the bench we have so they stay rested somewhat. not that this trade has much chance but stranger things have happened. I bet noone saw camby traded for a bag of magic beans…

by warriorbum on Jul 29, 2008 6:43 PM PDT reply actions

The way some cats throw around 3 & 4 team trades...

You’d think it would happen more often than it does. Guys, its tough enough trying to hash out a “fair trade” between 2 parties. By adding a 3rd or 4th party, you’re just increasing the difficulty level exponentially. There may not be 4-team trades for years at a time & I don’t think there has ever been a year when more than 1 of those occured in the same year. I think the likely hood of AB hiting a trey in a game is more probable than an executed 4-team trade this year. There are REAL reasons why 4-team trades don’t happen that often.

"I am the CHOSEN ONE"

by Tim&ChrisBurger on Jul 29, 2008 7:45 PM PDT reply actions

Don't say that...

They might get offended and give you a copy of their resume which includes the blog their dad lets them play with, the NCAA all stars they live with, and the number of times ESPN has linked their blog.

What about the likelyhood of Tim Duncan hitting a trey in the waning moments of a playoff game to tie it up?

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 30, 2008 7:24 AM PDT up reply actions

Hey... I work hard...

Plus I read those blogs! So my opinion is obviously better than yours! ;)

by Mr. Monday Night on Jul 30, 2008 5:22 PM PDT up reply actions

My money's on....

a 4 team trade happening this year, for sure.
Remember, the NO BALLS ASSOSCIATION is dead and buried after last season … some teams want cap space, some teams want it all NOW.
I’d say right before the season starts, some itchy fingers will start pulling triggers

J-Smooth to the BAY
Run TMC Appreciation Society

by warriordownunder on Jul 30, 2008 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions

Under-rated JSmoove?

You guys honestly don’t give enough credit to Josh Smith. How many Prep-to-Pros come out averaging 2 blocks per game? At 6’9” Josh has got the height of a PF, but possesses a weaker post game than your prototypical 4’s i.e. (Tim Duncan/ Al Jefferson/Dwight Howard), however at an athletic 235 lbs. you wouldn’t expect him to be a true post player. He’s a slasher with some jump shot ability good out to around 22-23ft, sure he isn’t consistent with his 3’s at all, hence the 0.263 career avg. behind the arc, but he gives you a 45% fg. percentage, C’MON people. How can you even say 45% is horrible for a combo guard/foward? He isn’t a PF. His game isn’t limited to the post area. Not to say that all PF’s are limited to the paint, but those who aren’t are usually combo fowards. The only reason why, I believe anyways, Jsmoove hasn’t fully expanded his game, is because in Atlanta he isn’t their premier scorer or go-to-guy, it’s Joe Johnson. He’s a beast! He play’s aggressive D, which often leads to O. He’s also a pretty well rounded rebounder, not the greatest, but definitely well rounded. Look at some of his highlights & tell me he can’t run with the Dub’s or that he’s not worth AT LEAST 9-10 mil. & ONLY 22? Jeeze.

- iBall, do you?

by iBallGSW on Jul 31, 2008 1:26 AM PDT reply actions

but he gives you a 45% fg. percentage,

He spent much of his time at the PF spot. As such, he should have had significant opportunity to operate inside. This didn’t result in a higher FG%. And for a forward who isn’t hitting a bunch of 3’s, that’s not the least bit impressive. The average FG% for the entire league is ~45%. That figure includes all your lucky to get off the bench Troy Hudsons in the mix too. It’s not the average for starting players. Not the average for starting forwards. It’s what the league as a whole shoots. A starting forward who is not exceeding this should not count it as an asset. Horrible? No. Good? No. It really isn’t good. It’s a middle of the road SF mark, and nothing at all more than that.

by jae on Jul 31, 2008 8:47 AM PDT reply actions

He spent much of his time at the PF spot.

The only reason he did spend THAT much time at the 4, is primarily cause it was a need for the team. The Hawks didn’t have a true 4 to play last season, or at least not one good enough to start. I believe if they had a true 4 to play next to Horford and Smith, he would have been played at the 3 more than the 4.

- iBall, do you?

by iBallGSW on Aug 1, 2008 4:36 PM PDT reply actions