# The Hawks and Joe Johnson



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_y...g=mc-afterthebuzzer012910&prov=yhoo&type=lgns



> Business looks like it will be good for Johnson this summer. He turned down a four-year, $60 million extension offer from the Hawks in the offseason in hopes of landing a more lucrative deal this summer. While the Hawks might be on the fence about giving Johnson a max deal, one of the many teams with deep pockets that miss out on Bosh, James, Wade or Amar’e Stoudemire(notes) could make an enticing offer. Even if the Hawks advance deep into the playoffs, expect Johnson to check out all of his options.
> 
> “I try not to think about it much,” Johnson said.
> 
> Keeping coach Mike Woodson might help the Hawks’ hopes of re-signing Johnson. Woodson has led the Hawks to the playoffs the past two seasons, and is contention to be the Eastern Conference’s All-Star coach. He’s also on this season’s short list of Coach of the Year candidates, yet his contract expires after the season. Hawks general manager Rick Sund makes it a policy to not address contract issues until the offseason. Still, Johnson acknowledged that the decision on Woodson could play a role in his own.


Would letting him walk kill the franchise's momentum?

Pros of letting him go:

He's about to be 30, he's not a franchise player, he plays at a dime a dozen position, Jeff Teague looks like a potential dynamite scorer. You might just want to suck it up and let someone else overpay him.

Cons of letting him go:

He's your best player for one. You'd lose your best playmaker and your primary ballhandler without other attractive options, and it would probably cause a notable amount of fan dissension. The team's stock is the highest it's been in 12+ years. Smith and Horford are still exciting players on the upswing but they're what you put around a Joe Johnson, not substitute him with.

I think what's going to end up happening is someone who missed out on the top tier free agents will give him a huge deal the Hawks don't want to match. At the end of the day, the Hawks are on an upward swing but I don't imagine them ever reaching the Finals as is. As someone who's seen the Wizards the past few years, I'll say it's not worth overpaying just to contend. Let him walk and make due if you can't meet at something reasonable. He already turned down 15M a year, anything over that he doesn't deserve.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

Well isnt Bibby a free agent also? I dont think they want to give Bibby a big deal
So I say let Bibby go, and resign JJ
Bibby is a solid player but like you said Teague looks like he is gonna be good and they already have Crawford too


----------



## myst (Feb 22, 2006)

Signing JJ will cripple the franchise in the future. Letting him go and building around their young talant is by far the best way to go. Unfortunately most fans aren't very basketball savvy and just want to see good things TODAY


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

fjkdsi said:


> Well isnt Bibby a free agent also? I dont think they want to give Bibby a big deal
> So I say let Bibby go, and resign JJ
> Bibby is a solid player but like you said Teague looks like he is gonna be good and they already have Crawford too


Bibby got a new contract last off-season so did Zaza and Marvin. I think it was like for three years, but I can't remember.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

It's what you call a conundrum. If you let Johnson walk it's a giant step backwards, unless you turn the resulting capspace into something similar. If you give Johnson a long term Max contract it's probably going to keep the team exactly where it is for a couple of years and then cripple it. If I could give him the Max for three years with a team option that's what I'd do, even though I'd know that I'd probably regret it in the last year. No way I'd give him a long term Max contract, that would just kill you and all too soon.


----------



## Greg Ostertag! (May 1, 2003)

Turning down the $60 million dollar extension was clearly a terrible decision. There is no way he gets that on the open market. The Hawks could almost afford to let the market set the price, as it will almost certainly be less than the aforementioned extension in the current climate... but that could offend Johnson who has shown to be an emo in previous contract discussions.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Greg Ostertag! said:


> Turning down the $60 million dollar extension was clearly a terrible decision. There is no way he gets that on the open market. The Hawks could almost afford to let the market set the price, as it will almost certainly be less than the aforementioned extension in the current climate... but that could offend Johnson who has shown to be an emo in previous contract discussions.


I disagree. He's going to get it from New York, New Jersey or Chicago. I think he's gone and I think it's the right decision for the Hawks, because a six year deal is just not what you give to Joe at this point in his career. I like him a lot, but I say you see how far you can go and if you don't go far, let him go. If the Hawks make the Eastern Conference Finals, then I re-consider, but if they lose in the 2nd round again (yes I let him walk).


----------



## myst (Feb 22, 2006)

Greg Ostertag! said:


> Turning down the $60 million dollar extension was clearly a terrible decision. There is no way he gets that on the open market. The Hawks could almost afford to let the market set the price, as it will almost certainly be less than the aforementioned extension in the current climate... but that could offend Johnson who has shown to be an emo in previous contract discussions.


I disagree. Was turning down the $60 million dollar contract bad? Maybe, because he would be making $15 million a year in a city he knows well and a team on the rise. But he will definitely get more then $60 million in free agency. There are too many teams with too much cap space, and he is probably the 5th best free agent. If Lebron and Wade stay, then it is Amare, Bosh and JJ as the top 3 free agents. Miami, NY, NJ and Chicago will be fighting for those 3 players, which means one of the teams will have to overpay to get him.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

Greg Ostertag! said:


> Turning down the $60 million dollar extension was clearly a terrible decision. There is no way he gets that on the open market. The Hawks could almost afford to let the market set the price, as it will almost certainly be less than the aforementioned extension in the current climate... but that could offend Johnson who has shown to be an emo in previous contract discussions.


there's basically no question about it, he is going to get $60 mil+ on the open market.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Isn't Dirk a free agent as well?



> It's what you call a conundrum. If you let Johnson walk it's a giant step backwards, unless you turn the resulting capspace into something similar. If you give Johnson a long term Max contract it's probably going to keep the team exactly where it is for a couple of years and then cripple it. If I could give him the Max for three years with a team option that's what I'd do, even though I'd know that I'd probably regret it in the last year. No way I'd give him a long term Max contract, that would just kill you and all too soon.
> __________________


Well they got Crawford for some trash, maybe they feast on other teams not wanting to pay marginal stars again. They can hope that Teague will emerge as a better Bibby, hope that Horford starts attracting double teams... the book is probably closed on Marvin Williams and Smith took his leap forward this season. I don't see why they can't become bonafide contenders by resigning Johnson.


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

HKF said:


> I disagree. He's going to get it from New York, New Jersey or Chicago. I think he's gone and I think it's the right decision for the Hawks, because a six year deal is just not what you give to Joe at this point in his career. I like him a lot, but I say you see how far you can go and if you don't go far, let him go. If the Hawks make the Eastern Conference Finals, then I re-consider, but if they lose in the 2nd round again (yes I let him walk).


 This is what's wrong with the Eastern Conference. You notice most if not all the teams gearing up for the 2010 off season are in the east. Always looking for the big superstar to magically turn a mediocre squad into a winner. They never have the patience to build like Portland, OKC and others who just acquire young talent and let them grow into a winning team.

Only Wade or LeBron have that power of those who might change teams. If LeBron and Wade stay home, NY, NJ ,Chi and whomever else will pay good players "great" salaries.

Can Joe Johnson really play with Rose ? They both need the ball. Could Amare really make that much of a difference in NY without Nash ? If Bosh goes to Mia, who is their Center..and what about Beasley ?

I see Johnson as Elton Brand. Good, solid player and that's all.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

The Hawks run the risk of making the fatal mistake of paying a player that's good but not a franchise player, franchise money. He's 30, and while he's an all-star, he isn't a superstar. If he turned down $15 mill a year then he's looking for a fat deal that will cripple the future of the franchise. It's tough to let him walk when they are improving every year, but re-signing him to a huge contract will make sure that they stay in limbo between great and bad.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

Actually , if they keep JJ and LeBron leaves lets say to the Nets, they have a shot at a championship
The Nets will at least need one year to be a contender even with LeBron on the team, the Hawks have proven they can beat the Celtics and the Cs are a year older next season and than the Magic are always a question mark... Now the Lakers, I dunno what could possibily go wrong there, but bare with me


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

If I'm the Hawks I keep Joe Johnson, they are only gonna continue to get better, and letting him walk would kill their momentum and it will make their fans feel isolated because they let him walk just to save money. If you are a winner/contender you need to spend money, and he may not be a superstar but in that system he is a good fit, and other guys like Josh Smith and Marvin Williams and Horford will continue to evolve and become better, so it will all even out imo.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Also I wonder how fast JJ will drop off when he gets older. His game isn't completely reliant on athleticism like some guys


----------



## myst (Feb 22, 2006)

LA68 said:


> This is what's wrong with the Eastern Conference. You notice most if not all the teams gearing up for the 2010 off season are in the east. Always looking for the big superstar to magically turn a mediocre squad into a winner. They never have the patience to build like Portland, OKC and others who just acquire young talent and let them grow into a winning team.


You have no idea what you're talking about. You know how Portland and OKC built their team? By sucking. By being a terrible team and getting high draft picks. Do you think they signed Kevin Durant, Brandon Roy, Greg Oden, Russel Westbrook, Jeff Green...? (And by the way, there is no indication Portland or OKC will ever win a championship. They are too good now to get high draft picks so they will have to make trades to become better.) So in your eyes, you can't build a team unless you suck. Well what about the mediocre teams trying to be great? They make trades and sign free agents. Look at the Celtics, and wait for it... the Lakers, the team you happen to root for. Where do you think the Lakers got Odom, Gasol, Artest, and so on? 

Now, the Nets could do it your way, but with so much cap space, wouldn't it be easier and quicker to use it to sign an all-star instead of hoping to draft one? The Heat can't do it with young talent because Wade is in his prime and now is the time to try and win a championship, so using cap space is the BEST way to go. The Knicks don't have a first round pick, but do have cap space. What would you recommend they do? Sit on the cap space and hope they get a good draft pick next season?

Come on man... think about it.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

ATLien said:


> Also I wonder how fast JJ will drop off when he gets older. His game isn't completely reliant on athleticism like some guys


It's not just his age. It's the minutes he's played over his career. Michael Finley used to play a lot of minutes too and when he declined, he just fell of a cliff.


----------



## Smithian (Apr 3, 2006)

If the Hawks let him go, it will be hilarious to watch them collapse. He is the glue that holds that team together. Team leader, stat filler, and he lead the resurrection of that franchise. The Hawks have a lot of good pieces... You're not going to find another Joe Johnson any time soon to hold it all together.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

their best shot is still to get joe johnson to sign a decent sized contract. i wouldn't blame the hawks if they let JJ go though. JJ is much like Michael Redd a few seasons ago. All-star who's pretty good but not someone you pay franchise money for.

to be honest, I think Josh Smith and Horford are just as responsible as JJ for their turnaround. In fact I tend to like Al Horford's intangibles the most. Stat-wise he's the least impressive with a mere 12-13ppg 10rpg but he has that swagger that's contagious to the entire team. It makes all of his teammates play better.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

All the Hawks would need to do is get another primary playmaker. Crawford and Teague would love to take Johnson's shots. Crawford can get assists but he doesn't have Johnson's court vision. If they lose the guy who sets the table and don't replace him they're in trouble.


----------

