BizarroJerry wrote:Agree with Lip, Cool, Duke and others. We don't need a max guy or someone in their 30's who'll demand lots of playing time. Top 5 pick, ideally Buddy or similar and a good bench defender to play along with Tyus and Bazz. KG and Pek will come off the books after next year, let's wait until then to address this.
Some of you may be missing the biggest point though. We should sign a player, or players, this year before the huge leap in cap space for 2017-2018 (which is why many max players may take a 1 year deal this year). In a scenario I like, we sign a Deng type, Pachulia or Aldrich type, and a backup PG for 2-3 years for the same amount of money that a max contract would cost us this offseason. With KG and Pek coming off the books next year that will free up money to save to sign our top 5 guys, or free up money to add one more big free agent. That combined with our top guys, if they make their ceiling in 2-3 years, will push us up into or near the luxury tax. I suppose you could make the same argument about this being the year to sign a max guy because of the same issues, but I don't see anyone outside of Durant who is worth 25mil+ a year.
Ideally we keep our top 5 pick and bring in 2-3 good role players, maybe one is a possible starter. It's definitely feasible with our young proven talent, and our new head coach. Let's not pigeon-hole ourselves with one player for 4-5 seasons when we aren't completely confident in what we currently have here.
Okay I see your point, but then I'd much rather give that money to someone like Barnes.
Why Barnes?
As I see it, we're not a starting 5 player away from contending, we're 3-6 players away from the #6-#11 slots from contending for/in the playoffs.
Two reasons. #1 he is an outstanding talent that would help establish a winning culture. And #2, his age lines up with the rest of our core. Like I said in a previous post, we need more players around Rubio's age that can be part of the present and the future. I agree with others that's a little too early to throw a bunch of money at veteran fringe players like Deng. Players like that can decline very rapidly (see Kevin Martin) and we don't need to hamstring ourselves with big contracts on players past their prime.
So you're not willing to risk "sort-of hamstringing" our team with proven veterans that know the nuances of the game because they may fall off, yet you're willing to risk "fully hamstringing" our team with a young talent, who has played beside 4-5 better players, who will command near to, if not fully, a max contract? I can't justify that myself. Please build the bench with veterans who are not going to lose you games..
TheFuture wrote:So you're not willing to risk "sort-of hamstringing" our team with proven veterans that know the nuances of the game because they may fall off, yet you're willing to risk "fully hamstringing" our team with a young talent, who has played beside 4-5 better players, who will command near to, if not fully, a max contract? I can't justify that myself. Please build the bench with veterans who are not going to lose you games..
Of all the guys bandied about here, Barnes seems like the one who yields the worst value on a per $ basis. He's a low usage 3 & D guy who probably wants max money and can really only play one position. His age fits great with the rest of our core, but that's the biggest thing going for him IMO.
We definitely need strong role players and at some point, an overpay is probably necessary. The question is who is the best guy to overpay? Deng and Horford split my vote.
Honestly so think Bantum makes a lot of sense as well he does everything pretty well would add shooting defense a little play making. If you could sign that guy (or one of these top guys) I think you have to do it.
To me though I still like the idea of signing some solid players like Jon Leuer, Brandon Bass, Jared Dudley, Ronnie Price etc. obviously you could sign a top FA and get at least one of those guys also but yeah.
Something I was thinking about lately what kind of market do you think Boban from the Spurs will have? ge would be an interesting guy to add to help with the problem of not having a big C on the team. I'm more just curious in general what kind of contract he ends up getting.
Saw someone point out Horford's playoff production... Somehow left out that for the series, he's averaging 13.5 PPG, 9.8 RPG, 3.8 APG, 3.0 BPG, 1.0 SPG, 1.3 TOV, and though his efficiency has dipped against Boston, his TS% is still OK thanks to his 90% shooting at the line. What more do you want the guy to do? The Hawks are tied in the series 2-2, but if not for Jeff Teague completely mucking up the final possession in Game 4 regulation, they could be up 3-1 right now.
PS: Horford's been good in the playoffs almost his entire career.
I side with Future and Q on Barnes. While I like his improved defense, his offense seems to come mostly from ridiculously open jumpers due to his teammates attracting so much attention. He's already turned down $16 million for 4 years from the warriors, so you know he thinks he can be close to a max player. This club doesn't need to pay $20 million+ to another player 3-6 years short of his prime...what they need is vets who can balance out the roster and, yes, "mentor" our terrific young core.
Barnes and the coaching staff joke about his inability to operate in a pick and roll offense...he's completely inept. If you're the warriors and you can carve out a very useful role for Barnes outside PnR, you can afford to joke about this. But I don't think other teams would find it so funny. I don't see him as a good fit here at all, and if Barnes is smart, he'll take the $18 million he can probably get from the Warriors and continue to be successful and win championships. He seems like a smart guy, so if the Warriors decide they want him, I think he stays there.
Camden wrote:Saw someone point out Horford's playoff production... Somehow left out that for the series, he's averaging 13.5 PPG, 9.8 RPG, 3.8 APG, 3.0 BPG, 1.0 SPG, 1.3 TOV, and though his efficiency has dipped against Boston, his TS% is still OK thanks to his 90% shooting at the line. What more do you want the guy to do? The Hawks are tied in the series 2-2, but if not for Jeff Teague completely mucking up the final possession in Game 4 regulation, they could be up 3-1 right now.
PS: Horford's been good in the playoffs almost his entire career.
Teague is the only reason they had a chance on that final possession.
Camden wrote:Saw someone point out Horford's playoff production... Somehow left out that for the series, he's averaging 13.5 PPG, 9.8 RPG, 3.8 APG, 3.0 BPG, 1.0 SPG, 1.3 TOV, and though his efficiency has dipped against Boston, his TS% is still OK thanks to his 90% shooting at the line. What more do you want the guy to do? The Hawks are tied in the series 2-2, but if not for Jeff Teague completely mucking up the final possession in Game 4 regulation, they could be up 3-1 right now.
PS: Horford's been good in the playoffs almost his entire career.
Teague is the only reason they had a chance on that final possession.
Camden wrote:Saw someone point out Horford's playoff production... Somehow left out that for the series, he's averaging 13.5 PPG, 9.8 RPG, 3.8 APG, 3.0 BPG, 1.0 SPG, 1.3 TOV, and though his efficiency has dipped against Boston, his TS% is still OK thanks to his 90% shooting at the line. What more do you want the guy to do? The Hawks are tied in the series 2-2, but if not for Jeff Teague completely mucking up the final possession in Game 4 regulation, they could be up 3-1 right now.
PS: Horford's been good in the playoffs almost his entire career.
Yeah, he's typically been a pretty good playoff player and I like his consistent scoring efficiency (although Mikkeman makes a good point that Gorgui was more efficient than Horford last year). But he's auditioning now for a max contract, and being held to single digits in back to back road games in the playoffs has to raise some eyebrows. I don't know, but I have a feeling that Thibs will be interested in Horford...he's a very good win-now option. So I'll be watching him very closely over his remaining playoff games to see if I can be sold on giving him a max contract.
Camden wrote:Saw someone point out Horford's playoff production... Somehow left out that for the series, he's averaging 13.5 PPG, 9.8 RPG, 3.8 APG, 3.0 BPG, 1.0 SPG, 1.3 TOV, and though his efficiency has dipped against Boston, his TS% is still OK thanks to his 90% shooting at the line. What more do you want the guy to do? The Hawks are tied in the series 2-2, but if not for Jeff Teague completely mucking up the final possession in Game 4 regulation, they could be up 3-1 right now.
PS: Horford's been good in the playoffs almost his entire career.
Teague is the only reason they had a chance on that final possession.
Huh?
Back to back 3's in the last 50 seconds to put them up by 2 before Boston tied it with 15 seconds left.
