PDA

View Full Version : Josh Smith anybody? ESPN trade rumor



vnzla81
06-15-2009, 05:04 PM
ESPN.com
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2009/insider/news/story?page=09DraftBuzz&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fdraft2009%2finsider%2fnews%2fstory%3fpage%3d09D raftBuzz
POSTED: June 15 -- 2:08 p.m. ET


Smith
Chad Ford: The big trade rumor flying around (if you're already tired of the Shaq-to-Cleveland talk) centers on the Hawks' Josh Smith. Several league sources told ESPN.com that the Hawks have been working hard the past few weeks to see whether they can find a taker for Smith.

The Hawks have some financial issues coming into the summer. Two key players, Mike Bibby and Marvin Williams, are free agents. So are a few others on the roster -- Josh Childress, Zaza Pachulia and Ronald Murray. Although the Hawks would like to keep those players, they can't afford to pay all of them. That has opened the door to the possibility of trading Smith, who, although talented, has a reputation as a difficult player to coach.

The Hawks have had no problem finding teams interested in Smith. The issue is the whopping $6 million trade kicker attached to his contract. The trade kicker essentially would require the team that trades for Smith to pay him the $6 million immediately. In this economic climate, many owners will balk at the payment.

"You are going to see very few owners willing to do things like that anymore," one GM said. "I'm not saying he's impossible to trade. There are a few owners like Paul Allen, James Dolan, Mark Cuban and maybe Daniel Gilbert who would pay the money. But there aren't many."

ESutt7
06-15-2009, 05:12 PM
No thanks. Troublemaker, awful shooter. Fun to watch when he's not on your team though!

Lance George
06-15-2009, 05:18 PM
He had a little bit of an off year last season but he's young (23) and a major stat-sheet-stuffer. The attitude turns me off, but he'd be the power forward of the future we've been looking for.

pacergod2
06-15-2009, 05:18 PM
He would bring good defense, terrific rebounding and shot blocking, which are things we definitely need. I just have questions about his willingness to adapt to a team setting. I think he is a little too selfish and lazy for what we are looking for. Talent is definitely there and I wouldn't mind if we made a deal to get the guy. I think we could get him fairly cheap, like a TJ Ford and #13 for Josh Smith and #19, which I think I would enjoy seeing happen. Maybe you put him in an environment like we have and he is a different person. I can't imagine the locker room in Atlanta to be very positive. Jack, Rush, Granger, Smith, and Hibbert all of a sudden sounds like a pretty solid unit defensively.

naptownmenace
06-15-2009, 05:19 PM
I was interested in a Murphy for Smith swap until I read that bit about the trade kicker. That's not just a kicker, that's a killer.

pacergod2
06-15-2009, 05:21 PM
Agreed Naptown.

vnzla81
06-15-2009, 05:23 PM
I was interested in a Murphy for Smith swap until I read that bit about the trade kicker. That's not just a kicker, that's a killer.

The Pacers can maybe send another trade kicker in Tinsley. I would send Ford, Tinsley and 13th pick for him and filler

Young
06-15-2009, 05:26 PM
I hope the Pacers stay away from Smith. He brings some good things but also might bring some really bad things that don't make any possible deal worth it.

Doddage
06-15-2009, 05:32 PM
With our system, he'll be on the perimeter and have freedom to jack up threes, which is not a pretty thought.

tadscout
06-15-2009, 05:39 PM
The Pacers worked soo hard to rework the team chemistry into how great it is now... why ruin it all w/ one trade?

Plus the trade kicker of paying him an additional 6 million would be an automatic veto from the Simons (on top of the bad chemistry/ character he'd bring...)

vnzla81
06-15-2009, 05:39 PM
With our system, he'll be on the perimeter and have freedom to jack up threes, which is not a pretty thought.

I disagree, he would be dunking on people that dare to double team Danny. I like the player but I have some issues with his atituted. Also think that the Pacers can't have to many boy scouts in the team, they need one or two crazy guys who wants to play hard and get in the other team head.

MillerTime
06-15-2009, 05:40 PM
Whats the trade kicker? Why does he have to be paid $6million? Is that what the Hawks owed him?

Smith is a hard-case. Bird spent too much time and efforts putting together a team that has great chemistry. With Smith in town, our locker room is guaranteed to have issues

Slick Pinkham
06-15-2009, 05:46 PM
Whats the trade kicker? Why does he have to be paid $6million? Is that what the Hawks owed him?

a bonus written into his contract as reward for accepting a trade

I'll rather pay him 6 million extra to play than pay Tinsley 6 million to sit, and he has the hellacious athleticism to be a matchup problem for everybody at the 4 when on a team that runs the ball.

The head case issue worries me. I'd do it to get rid of Tinsley, but such an offer would get hysterical laughter and a big "click" on the ATL end of that phone conversation.

ThA HoyA
06-15-2009, 05:49 PM
well if he gets traded im done buying jerseys i would only have 1 jersey that hasnt been traded "knock on wood" Demarcus ware...

also ive watched him play alot and got the chance to watch him in person.... my conclusion was that he hates playing in that hawks offensive because its nothing but isolations. Hes a willing passer and in every interview he talks about having to play defense. He would solve a lot of our on court problems and would be a blast to watch play. However i have no idea how he is in the locker room. But if jack comes back and with danny and foster still here id take that chance.

tadscout
06-15-2009, 05:53 PM
He just seems like Ron Artest without the offcourt issues... I just wouldn't want those interruptions with our young developing team...

pianoman
06-15-2009, 06:14 PM
I would imagine that a guy like this being on the market, would be someone LB is wanting. He could be a piece that gets us to that next level. The thought of having a starting lineup of Jack/Rush/Granger/Smith/Hibbert with Dun Dun coming off the bench is pretty scary. The locker room trouble could be just an atlanta thing. I'd give him a chance.

billbradley
06-15-2009, 06:17 PM
i get the whole maturity worries, but he plays in a slower offense that doesn't fit his skill set. his poor shot selection could be the result of the hawks offense that puts him closer to the perimeter and iso other players. i skimmed his free throw attempts and 3 point attempts before bibby and both looked higher after bibby. maybe a pacers team that uses more of his strengths would alleviate frustrations causing to hinder the maturity process (in his game and attitude)

i would try to do something with murph and tins for smith, speedy claxton, and something else. i doubt thats enough though

PR07
06-15-2009, 06:18 PM
I wanted him last year when he was a free agent. He has a bit of an attitude, but I haven't heard anything that points to off the court incidents, which is the main thing to avoid. He's young, he can score, and he blocks shots. I'd take him.

vnzla81
06-15-2009, 06:26 PM
The Pacers could be an scary team if they get a guy like him. He could be the perfect complement to Hibbert and Danny, his defense is really good and can also guard almost any position. If the Pacers keep playing up tempo, nobody is going to be able to run with him and stop him, one thing that I also like about him is that he is only 23 years old, meaning that he can still get better.

tadscout
06-15-2009, 06:33 PM
I would imagine that a guy like this being on the market, would be someone LB is wanting.

Skill wise absolutely agree... but attitude wise completely opposite... after Artest, Jackson, Williams, and Tinsley (all but Williams was a Walsh charity I'll give them a chance, we can mold them into better people case...) I'd imagine Bird isn't going to make that mistake again... Those players not only turned the city against the Pacers but they deeply divided the Pacers locker room and ruined the team chemistry...

Yes Smith had any off court issues like the others.... but has been equally disruptive as the others in the locker room... and I'm sorry, but chemistry is needed to be a successful team...

MillerTime
06-15-2009, 06:37 PM
Some people who think we should trade for Smith, who would we trade?

From the looks of things, ATL wants to shed salary and we have no expirers. And please no one mention pick up Quis' option because that would put us in LT.

Smith is a good defender but he still doesnt solve our problem of not having a PF with low post moves. If this was the case, I would rather make a move for Amare over Smith

tadscout
06-15-2009, 06:40 PM
Some people who think we should trade for Smith, who would we trade?

From the looks of things, ATL wants to shed salary and we have no expirers. And please no one mention pick up Quis' option because that would put us in LT

Exactly, PLUS you're asking the Simons to throw in an additional 6 million bonus of their own money... on top of all they are already losing... :-o:hmm:

aceace
06-15-2009, 07:08 PM
Maybe the Pacers could send Tinsley over to Josh's house to dust and mop, maybe wash his 8 cars once a week. Tinman makes about 6M+, he could be the highest paid house keeper in the world. He's not do anything anyways.

Doddage
06-15-2009, 07:28 PM
I disagree, he would be dunking on people that dare to double team Danny. I like the player but I have some issues with his atituted. Also think that the Pacers can't have to many boy scouts in the team, they need one or two crazy guys who wants to play hard and get in the other team head.
Yes, that's what he should be doing, but if he's out on the perimeter, then that can't happen. We're talking about a system that encourages guys like Marquis Daniels to shoot three-pointers.

I like Josh Smith for his various skills and think that he's fun to watch, but I don't picture him as our long-term PF solution. The way it looks like our team is being built, we need someone that is a capable man defender at that position. Smith, while he's a great shot blocker, is not someone that you turn to to guard the formidable post players of the league (which is what we sorely need to improve our interior defense).

CableKC
06-15-2009, 07:29 PM
Interested, sure....why not?

Do we have the pieces to acquire him? Nope....

rexnom
06-15-2009, 07:39 PM
I'll say no thanks in the interest of chemistry.

PR07
06-15-2009, 07:39 PM
It's not a bad thing to have some attitude on a team. I don't necessarily want a team of 15 milk drinkers. I never really had a problem with Jackson, Artest, and Tinsley ON the court, it was the off the court stuff that were constant distractions to the team and caused the negative attention (excluding the brawl).A lot of deep playoff teams had some supposed "attitude" guys as Artest, JR Smith, Birdman, K-Mart, and Rafer Alston all helped their teams make deep playoff runs.

We'd have to get a 3rd team though, and I doubt the Simons are willing to just hand out 6 million extra dollars even if we did.

MyFavMartin
06-15-2009, 08:12 PM
The only way the Hawks clear immediate salary space by trading Smith to sign the others, is they send him to a team under the cap or for an unguaranteed contract... right?

Roaming Gnome
06-15-2009, 08:40 PM
Interested, sure....why not?

Do we have the pieces to acquire him? Nope....

Yep, it doesn't get any simpler that that!

QuickRelease
06-15-2009, 08:58 PM
It's not a bad thing to have some attitude on a team. I don't necessarily want a team of 15 milk drinkers. I never really had a problem with Jackson, Artest, and Tinsley ON the court, it was the off the court stuff that were constant distractions to the team and caused the negative attention (excluding the brawl).A lot of deep playoff teams had some supposed "attitude" guys as Artest, JR Smith, Birdman, K-Mart, and Rafer Alston all helped their teams make deep playoff runs.

We'd have to get a 3rd team though, and I doubt the Simons are willing to just hand out 6 million extra dollars even if we did.

I don't necessarily want 15 milk drinkers either. But I'd just as readily pass on 1 milk spoiler. Selfishness and being difficult to deal with are not the same as toughness. He just seemed to blow off Mike Woodsen alot and do his own thing. But he is talented, you can't deny that.

vnzla81
06-15-2009, 09:07 PM
I think that a trade that could work for them and the pacers could be if the Pacers send TJ Ford, Atlanta is been looking for a PG for the last five years and maybe Diener or Rush to get the deal done for him.(maybe straight up for Murphy) Is really hard to find an available PF that has a good attitude, Josh, Amare and even Tyrus Thomas are good players but have issues, just like I said before, sometimes you need one or two guys that are crazy, almost every winning team has one.

cinotimz
06-15-2009, 09:14 PM
Hmmm. The thought of a Granger/Smith tandem sure is tantalizing from a talent standpoint.

If Im not mistaken Tinsley is already hanging out in Atlanta. Atlanta wouldnt have to pay any relocation expenses and they could could get a fine starting pg to replace free agent Mike Bibby. :D

As for the 6 million, Pacers could very well end up paying Tinsley that either for not playing this coming year or towards some sort of buyout, so there might be ways to rationalize the deal.

Most every team has at least one high maintenance player on the team. They mention hes tough to coach, so let the coach earn his money. I think they will have plenty of takers for him.

Talent always is the largest factor to most teams in the NBA.

Hicks
06-15-2009, 09:27 PM
I was surprised to come on and see a two-page thread. Figured the rumor must have specifically mentioned the Pacers. I guess it's all just people saying "nope", "no thanks", or "not going to happen"!

jeffg-body
06-15-2009, 09:32 PM
If the attitude can be held in check, the talent is worth a look. JOB has coached other high maintenance players pretty well, maybe he can handle Smith?

kellogg
06-15-2009, 10:09 PM
It's not a bad thing to have some attitude on a team. I don't necessarily want a team of 15 milk drinkers. I never really had a problem with Jackson, Artest, and Tinsley ON the court, it was the off the court stuff that were constant distractions to the team and caused the negative attention (excluding the brawl).A lot of deep playoff teams had some supposed "attitude" guys as Artest, JR Smith, Birdman, K-Mart, and Rafer Alston all helped their teams make deep playoff runs.


Agreed...'deep playoff runs'...but no championships.

tadscout
06-15-2009, 10:33 PM
.A lot of deep playoff teams had some supposed "attitude" guys as Artest, JR Smith, Birdman, K-Mart, and Rafer Alston all helped their teams make deep playoff runs.

As far as I know, the Birdman shouldn't be on that list... Yes he got suspended for the drugs, but he's fully recovered and a great story of presiverence now... and I've never heard one bad thing about him in the team chemistry / personal attitude wise, in fact his teammates were saying nothing put positives about him...

Just b/c he plays with a chip on his shoulder on the court doesn't mean he's a bad teammate off the court (lockerroom, practice, etc...) like Smith is...

If it didn't seem them both the Birdman and Denver want to resign, I'd love to have him here w/ the Pacers...

Shade
06-15-2009, 10:43 PM
Bad attitude + kicker = no chance

Kegboy
06-15-2009, 10:46 PM
whopping $6 million trade kicker

EPIC FAIL

jeffg-body
06-15-2009, 11:02 PM
I'd rather see the birdman in a P's uniform.

cinotimz
06-15-2009, 11:42 PM
Agreed...'deep playoff runs'...but no championships.


ummm...Dennis Rodman

croz24
06-15-2009, 11:47 PM
people do change...doubt smith's attitude changes anytime soon, but it's not like the pacers are going anywhere anytime soon...

Pacerized
06-15-2009, 11:50 PM
If the Hawks wanted to trade him to free up the salary to re-sign their own free agents then they should have done so before the regular season trade deadline. We had several expiring contracts to play with. I don't know what they hope to find now that would save them salary. Perhaps they're hoping to trade for a pick with a team under the cap. I don't see how the Pacers could help their situation unless we have a trade exception to work with.

Hicks
06-15-2009, 11:53 PM
people do change...doubt smith's attitude changes anytime soon, but it's not like the pacers are going anywhere anytime soon...

"Well, we're not very good, so let's make a move that undermines the goodwill we just busted our asses to generate in a sea of hostility and apathy."

Sounds like a plan.....

croz24
06-16-2009, 12:00 AM
"Well, we're not very good, so let's make a move that undermines the goodwill we just busted our asses to generate in a sea of hostility and apathy."

Sounds like a plan.....

lol what goodwill? not like the fans are showing up with the "character" players you all want. as a matter of fact, rumors even began this season questioning the pacers future in indianapolis. so keep cheering your character players on to mediocrity and eventually to a different city...

josh smith would instantly become our first or second most talented player and is actually an individual who helped lead his team to the second round of the playoffs this year and a near upset of boston the year before in the playoffs. who on our team has better credentials? jeff foster?

cdash
06-16-2009, 12:11 AM
I'd rather see the birdman in a P's uniform.

Me too.

I'll go ahead and pass on Josh Smith. His attitude sucks, he really doesn't fit as well as some people think, and he would go ape **** shooting ill-advised threes (and missing them horribly).

cdash
06-16-2009, 12:13 AM
lol what goodwill? not like the fans are showing up with the "character" players you all want. as a matter of fact, rumors even began this season questioning the pacers future in indianapolis. so keep cheering your character players on to mediocrity and eventually to a different city...

josh smith would instantly become our first or second most talented player and is actually an individual who helped lead his team to the second round of the playoffs this year and a near upset of boston the year before in the playoffs. who on our team has better credentials? jeff foster?

Right, and that should tell you something right there. He helped them reach the second round of the playoffs in God knows how long, and they still want to get rid of him. Don't say it's about the money either.

PR07
06-16-2009, 12:34 AM
Agreed...'deep playoff runs'...but no championships.

When's the last time we made a deep playoff run? Oh wait, it was with those guys with "bad attitudes".

crunk-juice
06-16-2009, 02:30 AM
we are not trying to build a church group here.. i would be ecstatic if we got Smith.

rexnom
06-16-2009, 03:16 AM
we are not trying to build a church group here.. i would be ecstatic if we got Smith.
Honestly, I couldn't care less what these guys do off the court. It's on the court where I worry. Smith is not a guy you want on your team from a chemistry standpoint. Just like Amare Stoudemire. I wouldn't touch these guys with a ten foot pole. I always liked Jack more so than Tinsley or Artest because Jack's teammates always love playing with him. You can't say that about the rest of our crew from those years.

croz24
06-16-2009, 04:11 AM
Honestly, I couldn't care less what these guys do off the court. It's on the court where I worry. Smith is not a guy you want on your team from a chemistry standpoint. Just like Amare Stoudemire. I wouldn't touch these guys with a ten foot pole. I always liked Jack more so than Tinsley or Artest because Jack's teammates always love playing with him. You can't say that about the rest of our crew from those years.

the only person who didn't love playing with artest was jo, and that was due to jealous imo...by all accounts just about every player who's played with ron has loved him. even granger still mentions how much of a mentor ron was to him.

Hicks
06-16-2009, 10:10 AM
the only person who didn't love playing with artest was jo, and that was due to jealous imo...by all accounts just about every player who's played with ron has loved him. even granger still mentions how much of a mentor ron was to him.

*edit*

Forget it. Waste of my time.

Slick Pinkham
06-16-2009, 10:35 AM
I never really had a problem with Jackson, Artest, and Tinsley ON the court, it was the off the court stuff that were constant distractions to the team and caused the negative attention.

Almost all of my problems with Tinsley were from on the court or not being eligible to be on the court- not being able to guard anyone all, not being eligible to play because of "conduct unbecoming", inconsistent effort, insistence on playground shots, etc.

same for Jax- awful shot selection, "taking over" the offense, inconsistent D, whining to the officials, complaining to coaches, etc.

much of the same is true for for Ron- on-court moodiness, lackadaisical play at crunch times, crazy stupid shots not in the flow of the game, arguing with refs, coaches, ill-timed technicals...

The myth that these guys were on-court darlings and off-court demons is revisionist history. Maybe Jax and Ron have matured and can control themselves on-court now. Good for them. I saw no evidence of that when they wore blue-and-gold, despite (I believe) concerted efforts on the part of the coaches and some team leaders to make it happen.

tadscout
06-16-2009, 04:54 PM
Almost all of my problems with Tinsley were from on the court or not being eligible to be on the court- not being able to guard anyone all, not being eligible to play because of "conduct unbecoming", inconsistent effort, insistence on playground shots, etc.

same for Jax- awful shot selection, "taking over" the offense, inconsistent D, whining to the officials, complaining to coaches, etc.

much of the same is true for for Ron- on-court moodiness, lackadaisical play at crunch times, crazy stupid shots not in the flow of the game, arguing with refs, coaches, ill-timed technicals...

The myth that these guys were on-court darlings and off-court demons is revisionist history. Maybe Jax and Ron have matured and can control themselves on-court now. Good for them. I saw no evidence of that when they wore blue-and-gold, despite (I believe) concerted efforts on the part of the coaches and some team leaders to make it happen.

:amen::iagree::thankyou:
:king:
:boomer:

Trophy
06-16-2009, 04:59 PM
With Boozer most likely leaving Utah. I think Smith would fit well there under Jerry Sloan.

PR07
06-17-2009, 02:26 AM
Almost all of my problems with Tinsley were from on the court or not being eligible to be on the court- not being able to guard anyone all, not being eligible to play because of "conduct unbecoming", inconsistent effort, insistence on playground shots, etc.

same for Jax- awful shot selection, "taking over" the offense, inconsistent D, whining to the officials, complaining to coaches, etc.

much of the same is true for for Ron- on-court moodiness, lackadaisical play at crunch times, crazy stupid shots not in the flow of the game, arguing with refs, coaches, ill-timed technicals...

The myth that these guys were on-court darlings and off-court demons is revisionist history. Maybe Jax and Ron have matured and can control themselves on-court now. Good for them. I saw no evidence of that when they wore blue-and-gold, despite (I believe) concerted efforts on the part of the coaches and some team leaders to make it happen.

I'd agree, they all came with their fair share of baggage on the court. Jackson could chuck and would take off plays arguing, Artest forced shots, and Tinsley pouted. However, I think if the Pacers had one of these guys, they would've been okay. The fact that they had three of them is like holding three lit fire crackers in your pocket, it's simply too hard to keep yourself safe without getting burned. One you can throw it aside quickly. Two maybe. Three no chance.

I don't mind bringing in one guy with an attitude. It's when you get too many in-mates and not enough sane people running the asylum that you have trouble. I hate to bring them up, but this reminds me a bit of the Patriots. They brought in a super talented player in Randy Moss but negative attitude, and benefited because they had enough "good citizens" to keep the locker room afloat.

Justin Tyme
06-17-2009, 07:20 AM
we are not trying to build a church group here..


Easy for you to say when you don't have 340 mil of "your money" invested, pay the bills, have lost millions, had your franchise image ruined, and lost much of your paying fan base due to those with attitude problems.