# Josh Smith to Portland?



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Prichard is indicating that he wants to trade quantity for quality, and upgrade the 3 position with a great defender. 

The Hawks have many wingmen, including Josh Smith, who is an animal on defense. The Hawks, also seem to covet Sergio Rodriguez, who probably won't get much of a chance in Portland with steady Steve Blake being the backup PG next year.

Would the Hawks go for this?

#13 pick in 2008, 2009
Sergio Rodriguez
choice of Channing Frye/Travis Outlaw/Martell Webster

for
Josh Smith?


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Yega1979 said:


> Prichard is indicating that he wants to trade quantity for quality, and upgrade the 3 position with a great defender.
> 
> The Hawks have many wingmen, including Josh Smith, who is an animal on defense. The Hawks, also seem to covet Sergio Rodriguez, who probably won't get much of a chance in Portland with steady Steve Blake being the backup PG next year.
> 
> ...


No, they wouldn't

By the way, you can't give away 1st round picks in consecutive years.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Yega1979 said:


> Would the Hawks go for this?
> 
> #13 pick in 2008, 2009
> Sergio Rodriguez
> ...


I really think we'd have to do more.

But I think a deal could be possible for Josh Smith. I don't think he's as untouchable as some people seem to think.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I can't see it happening.

If anybody is a more likely candidate from that Hawks team it would Josh Childress ... he's not nearly as talented overall as Smith, but he's very efficient inside and a great defender -- probably a lot "cheaper" (in terms what they'd demand back in personnel).


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Josh Smith has been on the block in Atlanta, and some in Atlanta don't think the owners will try to resign him.

And if they really think Sergio is the ****, why not? There have been plenty of other extremely lopsided trades in the nba over the last few years.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Yega1979 said:


> Josh Smith has been on the block in Atlanta, and some in Atlanta don't think the owners will try to resign him.
> 
> And if they really think Sergio is the ****, why not? There have been plenty of other extremely lopsided trades in the nba over the last few years.


How do we know they covet Sergio? Isn't it reasonable to assume they know just as well as we do that he can't shoot a lick and has other serious deficiencies? That's a worse trade than Gasol for Kwame Brown et. al.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

nikolokolus said:


> That's a worse trade than Gasol for Kwame Brown et. al.


Uh...no, that's not true.

Outlaw is a nice piece and cheaper than they could re-sign Josh Smith. I actually think it's not that outlandish to think that he's available.

A better candidate (and nearly equal defender) is Luol Deng. Could we possible get both Deng and Hinrich in one trade?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Fork said:


> A better candidate (and nearly equal defender) is Luol Deng.


I think Andre Iguodala also fits that category. I think the key to having a shot at Deng, Iguodala or Smith is if they demand big contracts and their current teams aren't willing to give them such deals. If Portland _is_ willing to max out a player of that caliber (star but not superstar level), it might be possible to pry one of them away.


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

They would probably like jack, him being from georgia tech and all, and they would LOVE to be rid of speedy claxtons ridiculous contract.

something like Josh Smith sign and trade for 12 million + speedy claxton

for

08 #1
raef
jack
frye

might be close

claxtons deal sucks cornhole, but thats the price we might have to pay.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

If the Hawks decide they don't want to pay as much as JS would command, then I think a trade might with the Blazers might be an outside possibility, but not for the players you suggest I would think. 

Sergio is just not worth a lot, but if they want him, he could be added. But what they need is another center to back up Al Horford and play C when Al is moved to PF. I think Przybilla might be who they would want. They would also like someone to replace smith to a degree, but cheaper, like either Outlaw or Webster. Since they already have a tweener in Williams, I think that Webster might be more to their liking to split time with Childress. 

So something like:
1st round pick 
Joel Przybilla
Webster
Sergio

for a resigned JS at about 9 mil per year.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Lol, a trade like this really gives meaning to the phrase "something for nothing."


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

I would be very hesitant to trade Joel, because our defense would be marshmellowy soft without him or Oden in the game. Having Joel and Oden for 48 minutes is going to be one of the keys to our sucess. 

I also wouldn't want to give up too much for a great defending SF if they don't shoot well. Ruben and Miles were poor shooters, and it really messed up our offense. 

But it would be disappointing if we can't pull of a trade, because we'll probably end up losing a lot of guys for nothing, due to how overcrowded the roster would be after adding two new starters and a lotto pick.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

B-Roy said:


> Lol, a trade like this really gives meaning to the phrase "something for nothing."


A lotto pick is nothing? Travis Outlaw is nothing? We may know that Sergio is probably nothing, but remember that not too long ago, many teams were really interested in him.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Yega1979 said:


> A lotto pick is nothing? Travis Outlaw is nothing? We may know that Sergio is probably nothing, but remember that not too long ago, many teams were really interested in him.


You realize that the 13th pick isn't really worth that much, neither is Sergio, and Outlaw may be worth something if the Hawks actually need him. 

Nothing we could offer aside from Oden/Aldridge/Roy would come close to getting Josh Smith. Look at his numbers and watch him play. The Hawks don't need a PG, they have Bibby. They also don't need a mediocre SF in Outlaw since Smith is WAY better. And they certainly don't need a draft pick. 

If you want Smith, you're going to have to offer Aldridge, because they need a good PF. That's something I'm not willing to do.

Outlaw/Sergio/Draft picks really is worth nothing compared to JS.

I don't think your idea of giving away random pieces you think we don't need for a good player is very well thought out. If everyone operated that way, we'd have more Gasol/Lakers trades.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Josh Smith IS playing their four position so saying they need a 4 is a bit of a fallacy. I can understand them wanting to be cheap and not pay him and that's fine. Perhaps we can get in on a deal getting him back and he can start at the 3 for us. They can play Horford at the 4 instead of the 5 like they are playing him now.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

Yega1979 said:


> Prichard is indicating that he wants to trade quantity for quality, and upgrade the 3 position with a great defender.
> 
> The Hawks have many wingmen, including Josh Smith, who is an animal on defense. The Hawks, also seem to covet Sergio Rodriguez, who probably won't get much of a chance in Portland with steady Steve Blake being the backup PG next year.
> 
> ...


Two things...

1. They wouldn't go for that

2. If Blake is the backup PG next year, and we trade Sergio, who is our starting PG? Actually who is our PG at all? Roy won't start the majority games at PG, regardless of how he distributes on offense. There are two sides to the court.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

LameR said:


> Two things...
> 
> 1. They wouldn't go for that
> 
> 2. If Blake is the backup PG next year, and we trade Sergio, who is our starting PG? Actually who is our PG at all? Roy won't start the majority games at PG, regardless of how he distributes on offense. There are two sides to the court.


Roy would be our starting PG. If you think hard enough, you will come up with many examples of big PGs who ran championship teams. The key thing to remember, is that your PG doesn't have to guard the other teams PG. And we've also got Oden and Joel inside to block shots.

Rudy and Roy would be our starting back court...you don't need to pigeon-hole your thinking into PG and SG...Rudy has great ball handling skills, and can run the break, Roy can run the half court offense, and if little guards want to go one on one and dribble into Oden and Joel all game, I'll take that. 

Notice how allowing penetration isn't a huge problem for Portland until Pryzbilla leaves the game...we're going to have two great shot blockers next year.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

Yega1979 said:


> Roy would be our starting PG. If you think hard enough, you will come up with many examples of big PGs who ran championship teams. The key thing to remember, is that your PG doesn't have to guard the other teams PG. And we've also got Oden and Joel inside to block shots.
> 
> Rudy and Roy would be our starting back court...you don't need to pigeon-hole your thinking into PG and SG...Rudy has great ball handling skills, and can run the break, Roy can run the half court offense, and if little guards want to go one on one and dribble into Oden and Joel all game, I'll take that.
> 
> Notice how allowing penetration isn't a huge problem for Portland until Pryzbilla leaves the game...we're going to have two great shot blockers next year.


I'm saying it may work fine on offense, but that's not what would worry me. I'm not pigeon-holing anyone. Roy could play PG, SG, or SF on offense if he wanted to.

The problem is that you seem to be saying on defense, we just let Roy either chase PGs them around the entire time or just matador them to our bigs? I don't see much sense in that. The man is great, but doing that for an entire game will make anyone tired, especially over 82 games. 

Also, counting on Oden/Joel to just stop everyone isn't going to work. Opposing teams aren't completely stupid. At some point they'll realize that their center will be open. If help defense slides, there should be someone open at the three point line, or in the high post. Not smart.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Yega1979 said:


> Roy would be our starting PG. If you think hard enough, you will come up with many examples of big PGs who ran championship teams. The key thing to remember, is that your PG doesn't have to guard the other teams PG. And we've also got Oden and Joel inside to block shots.
> 
> Rudy and Roy would be our starting back court...you don't need to pigeon-hole your thinking into PG and SG...Rudy has great ball handling skills, and can run the break, Roy can run the half court offense, and if little guards want to go one on one and dribble into Oden and Joel all game, I'll take that.
> 
> Notice how allowing penetration isn't a huge problem for Portland until Pryzbilla leaves the game...we're going to have two great shot blockers next year.


So.....if Roy isn't going to defend the opponents PG, then who is? Rudy certainly can't. 

Btw, Rudy doesn't have great ball handling skills, he gets carried away and turns it over.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Look Yega, I'm not opposed to the team making a play for J-smooth, but the trade scenario you originally cooked up just doesn't address any of the needs the hawks currently have; saying that it's realistic for Atlanta to go for a 3rd string PG, a second unit PF/SF, plus picks for arguably one of the best young 3/4's in the league just isn't likely.

After reading through other people's comments I'm more inclined to think they'd demand Joel, Raef, Jack, and one of Travis or Martell in some kind of sign and trade where we'd get Smith and Claxton.

Whatever the case, I'm not really sure this coming off-season is the year KP decides it's time to address the SF position -- Martell likely has at least one more year to figure it out (one way or another).


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Who defends them now? Blake, Jack? We don't have any great perimeter defenders on this team, and we get abused without a shot blocker. When Joel is in the game, it really changes things. It would be great to have a starting lineup where everyone was great at everything, but in the NBA, you've got to put your best foot forward.

Steve Blake, and certainly not Jarrett or Sergio will get minutes over Rudy Fernandez next year. It will work out fine...you'll see.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Yega1979 said:


> Who defends them now? Blake, Jack? We don't have any great perimeter defenders on this team, and we get abused without a shot blocker. When Joel is in the game, it really changes things. It would be great to have a starting lineup where everyone was great at everything, but in the NBA, you've got to put your best foot forward.
> 
> Steve Blake, and certainly not Jarrett or Sergio will get minutes over Rudy Fernandez next year. *It will work out fine...you'll see.*


Why am I not comforted? :thinking2:

Anyway, there's no denying that the team needs better perimeter defense ... which begs the question why wouldn't the team be more worried about using assets to consolidate at the PG position; it seems that the SF position is the lesser concern at this point, doesn't it?


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

nikolokolus said:


> Why am I not comforted? :thinking2:
> 
> Anyway, there's no denying that the team needs better perimeter defense ... which begs the question why wouldn't the team be more worried about using assets to consolidate at the PG position; it seems that the SF position is the lesser concern at this point, doesn't it?


If we add a PG, we can play Roy a SF, Rudy at SG, and said PG and PG.

But Roy plays best when he's running the point on offense, so what kind of PG would be good for this team, and who specifically? Calderon is good, but he wouldn't be much of an improvement in perimeter defense.

Having 3 players on the guard with great ballhandling skills could be lethal for other teams. Could we get him from Toronto for the same package?


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

If I was Atlanta Josh Smith would be the last SF on my team I would want to trade. No way thats happening.


----------



## Goubot (Aug 16, 2006)

B-Roy said:


> You realize that the 13th pick isn't really worth that much, neither is Sergio, and Outlaw may be worth something if the Hawks actually need him.
> 
> Nothing we could offer aside from Oden/Aldridge/Roy would come close to getting Josh Smith. Look at his numbers and watch him play. The Hawks don't need a PG, they have Bibby. They also don't need a mediocre SF in Outlaw since Smith is WAY better. And they certainly don't need a draft pick.
> 
> ...


I agree with everything in this post. The proposed deal is pretty insulting, frankly, even if you don't think much of Atlanta management.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Yega1979 said:


> If we add a PG, we can play Roy a SF, Rudy at SG, and said PG and PG.
> 
> But Roy plays best when he's running the point on offense, so what kind of PG would be good for this team, and who specifically? Calderon is good, but he wouldn't be much of an improvement in perimeter defense.
> 
> Having 3 players on the guard with great ballhandling skills could be lethal for other teams. Could we get him from Toronto for the same package?


I never mentioned Calderon ... but who would I like to see the team make a play for? How about Monta Ellis? He's lightning quick, wouldn't need the ball in his hands to be effective and certainly has the lateral quickness to keep opposing point guards in front of him ... I'm not saying he'd be a very realistic target, but probably just as realistic as Smith.

I don't have a problem with Brandon being the team's "point guard" ... at least in the half-court offense, but I think the blazers still need a lockdown defender to play in the back-court alongside Brandon and somebody to bring the ball up court most possesions, and from what little I know of Fernandez it doesn't sound like he quite fits that mold (Rudy will, in all likelihood, be playing a sort of Travis Outlaw role coming in as a sixth man scorer at his natural 2 guard position -- at least initially).

I have a feeling it's going to be a lively draft day!


----------



## EyeDK (May 24, 2006)

nikolokolus said:


> I can't see it happening.
> 
> If anybody is a more likely candidate from that Hawks team it would Josh Childress ... he's not nearly as talented overall as Smith, but he's very efficient inside and a great defender -- probably a lot "cheaper" (in terms what they'd demand back in personnel).


Childress seems like an interesting idea. I'm not familar with his game at all but he seems to be a better shooter than Smith and I would think from playing at Standford he would have more basketball smarts than a player out of high school. 

What type of defender is he? If anyone is familar with his game could you please share your thoughts on him? 

With Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Rudy, and Outlaw it seems the team needs more role players less stars and ego.

What would be a reasonable package for Childress?


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

EyeDK said:


> Childress seems like an interesting idea. I'm not familar with his game at all but he seems to be a better shooter than Smith and I would think from playing at Standford he would have more basketball smarts than a player out of high school.
> 
> What type of defender is he? If anyone is familar with his game could you please share your thoughts on him?
> 
> ...


Childress is coming in off the bench for Atlanta but typically gets abot 25+ minutes per game, his outside shooting is not his strong point, but his perimeter and team defense is very good, and he's adept at scoring inside and drawing tons of fouls. He shoots 59% because he doesn't take bad shots.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/stats?playerId=2373

As for what would be a reasonable package, probably Travis or Martell, Jack, and whatever it would take to make the contracts balance out.


----------



## chairman (Jul 2, 2006)

Yega1979 said:


> Josh Smith has been on the block in Atlanta, and some in Atlanta don't think the owners will try to resign him.



That does not surprise me. With his kind of talent there has to be a good reason why. I say stay away from him. He has "questionable" attitude written all over him. Plus to me he is another SF who plays better at the PF position. We already have one of those. And his team mates like him.


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

Yega1979 said:


> Prichard is indicating that he wants to trade quantity for quality, and upgrade the 3 position with a great defender.


Andre Iguodala, he's not that unfeasible. Philly is playing great, but still will have to decide if he's worth all that money, he would be embarrassed to take less now, but to play with solid post guys in Portland he might not be so hesitant to take the same/less, they love Thaddeus over there and think he has more potential than Iggy, the big debate is if he's a solid 2nd or 3rd option basically, he could be a third option/defensive specialist over here while really ramping up our fast break too. He can defend fast 1's with his physical play if he gives them space better than any of our 'speedy 1's'. If we're going with Brandon at the 1 in the half court we could swing it and just have a huge and very physical lineup...

Jack/Outlaw/Jones and our pick for re-signed Iggy.

They save money, preserve cap space, clear room for Thaddeus, get a steady player with potential in Outlaw, and another draft pick. We get everything we need and balance our team out.

next year
Blake/Sergio
Roy/Fernandez
Iggy/Webster
Aldridge/Frye
Oden/Pryz

one more year we can make the transition of Brandon playing the point and go with a very big back-court, then the spanish backup unit that throttles the already worn out other team.

Roy/Sergio
Iggy/Fernandez
Webster/(Roy/Iggy)
Aldridge/Frye
Oden/Pryz.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

darkhelmit54 said:


> Andre Iguodala, he's not that unfeasible. Philly is playing great, but still will have to decide if he's worth all that money, he would be embarrassed to take less now, but to play with solid post guys in Portland he might not be so hesitant to take the same/less, they love Thaddeus over there and think he has more potential than Iggy, the big debate is if he's a solid 2nd or 3rd option basically, he could be a third option/defensive specialist over here while really ramping up our fast break too. He can defend fast 1's with his physical play if he gives them space better than any of our 'speedy 1's'. If we're going with Brandon at the 1 in the half court we could swing it and just have a huge and very physical lineup...
> 
> Jack/Outlaw/Jones and our pick for re-signed Iggy.
> 
> ...


I love Iguodala but in NO WAY are we going to get him. Just no way, period.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Yega1979 said:


> Prichard is indicating that he wants to trade quantity for quality...


He was referring to trading our 4 picks for 1 or more better picks.


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

I would really like to know the specifics of his deal. Money, cap space, team willingness to pay him, and how long he has left.

Smith is a very interesting prospect for Portland, imo. If we end up getting Smith, i don't see us being able to get a PG at all, which is probably OK, because Brandon would probably end up spending a bit more time at the PG (which i don't like) while Rudy and smith join, with aldridge and oden.

If we could do like or 1st this year, a future first (in a few years i think because we can't trade 2 in a row) then package our 4 2nds to a late 1st round again, and then Serigo, Outlaw and cash, i wonder if they would do that. I heard that they might not be able to keep him once his deal is over, so gettin' stuff like Sergio, Outlaw and a couple 1sts would probably be nice. IDK though.


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

> Childress is coming in off the bench for Atlanta but typically gets abot 25+ minutes per game, his outside shooting is not his strong point, but his perimeter and team defense is very good, and he's adept at scoring inside and drawing tons of fouls. He shoots 59% because he doesn't take bad shots.


i really like childress. I really want to scout him a lot more. He seems like an intreguing prospect. Defense is what i LOVE.

http://www.nbadraft.net/profiles/joshchildress.asp is the NBADraft.net profile on him.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

darkhelmit54 said:


> Andre Iguodala, he's not that unfeasible. Philly is playing great, but still will have to decide if he's worth all that money, he would be embarrassed to take less now, but to play with solid post guys in Portland he might not be so hesitant to take the same/less, they love Thaddeus over there and think he has more potential than Iggy, the big debate is if he's a solid 2nd or 3rd option basically, he could be a third option/defensive specialist over here while really ramping up our fast break too. He can defend fast 1's with his physical play if he gives them space better than any of our 'speedy 1's'. If we're going with Brandon at the 1 in the half court we could swing it and just have a huge and very physical lineup...
> 
> Jack/Outlaw/Jones and our pick for re-signed Iggy.
> 
> ...


An Iggy post!? Well, it was bound to happen at some point...


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

MrJayremmie said:


> *I would really like to know the specifics of his deal. Money, cap space, team willingness to pay him, and how long he has left.*
> Smith is a very interesting prospect for Portland, imo. If we end up getting Smith, i don't see us being able to get a PG at all, which is probably OK, because Brandon would probably end up spending a bit more time at the PG (which i don't like) while Rudy and smith join, with aldridge and oden.
> 
> If we could do like or 1st this year, a future first (in a few years i think because we can't trade 2 in a row) then package our 4 2nds to a late 1st round again, and then Serigo, Outlaw and cash, i wonder if they would do that. I heard that they might not be able to keep him once his deal is over, so gettin' stuff like Sergio, Outlaw and a couple 1sts would probably be nice. IDK though.



his deal will probably be in the 10-13 million dollar per for 6 years range. 6 years 70 million maybe.

Atlanta will have no cap space, but they dont need any to resign him, they have his bird rights. we will have no cap space either, but a sign and trade can be facilitated.

as far as the hawks willingness to pay him, that is the wild card. he is certainly worth the money, but with adding bibby, and the impending extension of marvin williams, and josh childress also being a restricted free agent this offseason, it is conceivable that atlanta would be interested in moving him if it works out financially as well as on the court. it remains to be seen if the hawks are willing to have 4 max players, and still miss the playoffs next year.

as far as how long he has left, he is a restricted free agent this offseason, meaning he can sign with any team with cap room, but meaning atlanta has a week to match the offer. teams will approach atlanta as well inquiring about sign and trade possibilities.

i really think to have any chance of getting him, we would also have to take speedy claxton or zaza pachulia, and eat their salaries as well.


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

^Thank you so much for the info! So his deal is over after this year? awesome! It would have to go down as a sign-and-trade for us to aquire him.

Sounds like its possible. He is one of the SFs that i like that i feel is possible. I like Iguodala and Deng and so on.. but of course that isn't gonna happen.

It does make me sad that if we get him, we most likely won't be able to get our PG, but i'd definitely be ok with it. I'm a Blake lover anyway!

It would probably be... Outlaw, Sergio/Jack, LaFrentz, #13 pick, cash, and maybe a future 1st? I'd probably be willing to give that up for smith, speedy/zaza.

We would definitely, definitely miss Outlaw off the bench. He is instant offense, but gettin' a SF would be nice. Our 2nd unit would be sick.

By the all star break, maybe rudy adjusts to the NBA game and becomes a starter, which would make our team MUCh better, specially our rotation.

Its cool to think about. Smith would fit in nicely because he doesn't need shots on offense, which would be awesome for us. Roy, Rudy, Webster, Jones, Aldridge and Oden NEED shots. Smith would be the 4th option, if that. Smith would do the dirty work, block shots, rebound and so on. Would be sick!

After thinkin' about it a little more, to shorten our rotation, i think we could get even better by also playing Smith as backup PF.

Roy | Blake
Rudy | Webster
Smith | Jones
Aldridge | Smith
Oden | Pryzbilla

nice 9 man rotation. Frye, Jack/Sergio, speedy/zaza are out of the rotation, but sit in case of injuries maybe? Pretty sick rotation. We would finally be able to cut down our 11-12 man rotation to 9-10 man, which would make us a better team, imo.

Miles medically retires. McRoberts is released. Wafer's contract is sadly up...

That would be pretty sick, imo.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Eh, lots of misinformation in this thread but I don't really feel like correcting every one of you. The bottom line is Josh does not have a questionable attitude or poor work ethic or any of that nonsense. And Atlanta DOES want to re-sign him, but their ownership group has been trying to buy each other out and have been in court for two years so meeting Josh Smith's agent's demands might be tricky.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

LameR said:


> An Iggy post!? Well, it was bound to happen at some point...


... only this time it's with the surprising new twist of Outlaw being dealt for him

STOMP


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

nikolokolus said:


> Why am I not comforted? :thinking2:
> 
> Anyway, there's no denying that the team needs better perimeter defense ... which begs the question why wouldn't the team be more worried about using assets to consolidate at the PG position; *it seems that the SF position is the lesser concern at this point, doesn't it*?


I'm concerned about getting Rudy over here next season. Drafting or trading for another top backcourt talent this offseason could tip the scales the other way in his decision making process. Maybe this offseason would be best used to improve other areas of the team be it a starting SF or an upgrade to Channing. 

STOMP


----------



## #10 (Jul 23, 2004)

TheATLien said:


> Eh, lots of misinformation in this thread but I don't really feel like correcting every one of you. The bottom line is Josh does not have a questionable attitude or poor work ethic or any of that nonsense. And Atlanta DOES want to re-sign him, but their ownership group has been trying to buy each other out and have been in court for two years so meeting Josh Smith's agent's demands might be tricky.


So is there a realistic chance that Josh Smith leaves Atlanta? I'd been dismissing these trade suggestions as absurd. Also, Smith is more of a 4 than a 3, right? Does he occasionally play the 3, and if so, how well? And finally, what are the chances of Childress leaving?
Thanks, always nice to get opinions from the other side.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

#10 said:


> So is there a realistic chance that Josh Smith leaves Atlanta? I'd been dismissing these trade suggestions as absurd. Also, Smith is more of a 4 than a 3, right? Does he occasionally play the 3, and if so, how well? And finally, what are the chances of Childress leaving?
> Thanks, always nice to get opinions from the other side.


I can't say with confidence what the chances of Smith leaving town are, but I think it's more likely he is a Hawk next season than he isn't. But you never know.. I'm not ruling anything out. 

And you are right. Smith plays the 4 for Atlanta. Sometimes, Atlanta goes with a larger line-up with Smith at SF, Horford at PF, and Pachulia at C but that doesn't happen very often. The team seems to play better with a small line-up with Williams at SF, Smith at PF, and Horford at C. He is capable of playing the 3, but I would say that he definitely looks more comfortable as a 4 even though he is not a true power forward.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

TheATLien said:


> I can't say with confidence what the chances of Smith leaving town are, but I think it's more likely he is a Hawk next season than he isn't. But you never know.. I'm not ruling anything out.


Atlanta has been notoriously poor at supporting the Hawks at the gate. But they're up 500 per game to over 16,000 per last year to this, and with the excitement of being in the playoff hunt for the first time in a while they've been drawing over 17,000 lately. Unless he's a bleep to be around or there is some off court reason to not want Smith in their future, having more money coming in can only be increasing the chances he'll be resigned. 

Can't blame us for dreaming.


> And you are right. Smith plays the 4 for Atlanta. Sometimes, Atlanta goes with a larger line-up with Smith at SF, Horford at PF, and Pachulia at C but that doesn't happen very often. The team seems to play better with a small line-up with Williams at SF, Smith at PF, and Horford at C. He is capable of playing the 3, but I would say that he definitely looks more comfortable as a 4 even though he is not a true power forward.


6'7 barefoot with a 7' wingspan... thats pretty much average SF dimensions. I bet if the Hawks had better big man options then Pachulia he'd be playing primarily at the 3. He can hang with some 4's much like Outlaw can, but there is little those guys can do to stop the big bruisers (Carlos Boozer etc...) It's a nice option to have one of these Shaun Marion types to be able to up the tempo though...

STOMP


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

If we really just want a defensive juggernaught, would the Blazers go after Tyrus Thomas? Thomas is only getting 16 mpg with the Bulls, and doesn't seem to have any outside jumpshot, but he gets a ton of rebounds and blocks in his short amount of playingtime. He might turn into an Andre Kirelenko type player.

Maybe we could get him for our #1 and Channing Frye.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Yega1979 said:


> If we really just want a defensive juggernaught, would the Blazers go after Tyrus Thomas? Thomas is only getting 16 mpg with the Bulls, and doesn't seem to have any outside jumpshot, but he gets a ton of rebounds and blocks in his short amount of playingtime. He might turn into an Andre Kirelenko type player.
> 
> Maybe we could get him for our #1 and Channing Frye.


The Bulls have 5 guys who are primarily SFs in size and skills... I bet they'd be willing to talk. A big part of their failure this year was having such an imbalanced roster. Having their best player dinged and at 3/4 speed (Deng) didn't help matters either.

STOMP


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

STOMP said:


> The Bulls have 5 guys who are primarily SFs in size and skills... I bet they'd be willing to talk. A big part of their failure this year was having such an imbalanced roster. Having their best player dinged and at 3/4 speed (Deng) didn't help matters either.
> 
> STOMP


I also wonder if we could get Nocioni for the MLE this season. He's a free agent, and maybe he wants to come to a winning team with two other spanish speaking players.


----------

