How far would you go for Bogut? (Amended for 11Feb.)

[azuresou1]

29 and 31 are pretty old for the NBA, and in 4 years we'll be fielding a team that looks positively ancient.

Bogut - 26 now, 30 in 4 years, injury prone
Joe Johnson - 29 now, 33 in 4 years
Salmons - 35
Maggette - 35
Gooden - 33

We'll also have no foreseeable PG, absolutely no cap flexibility, and we'll be locked into a team that on paper even this year really ISN'T a contender.

[parson]

We have no cap flexibility right now, because the ASG has said it'll only go over the LT for a star.

Why didn't you mention that the core of our team - in 4 years - will be Joe (33), Bogut (30), Horford (28) and Marvelous (28)? Except for Joe, they'll be in their primes.

And you and I just disagree on whether or not that team would be a contender. Terrific starting 5, above-average bench...

[parson]

Spurs:
Tim Duncan (34)
Manu Ginobili (33)
Tony Parker (28)

Or maybe you could consider the Celtics...

[MaceCase]

You are missing out on the fact that all of those guys are already into their decline. It's not just paying guys in their thirties an ass load of money but paying guys that were never good to begin with an ass load of money in their thirties. Smoove for Bogut may not seem to you an equivalent exchange only because of the rarity of talented 7 footers but once you start to consider Smoove and TREMENDOUS cap savings then their value becomes more than equivalent.

[parson]

Sure, but they would all be BENCH PLAYERS for us. Their decline wouldn't be so noticeable against other bench players. Our present bench - minus Crawford - stinks. Gooden/Maggette/Salmons would be much better.

But those 3 aren't the important pieces: I keep saying that our core would be Bogut/Horford/Marvelous/Joe. Those players would be together for at least 5 years and Bogut/Horford/Marvelous would be effective for the next 10 years. Gooden/Maggette/Salmons don't matter but they will be effective bench players for the next 4-5 years.

4 years from now, we'd lose the 3 you're worrying about and would have their contracts to use.
When Joe's contract ends after that, we'll have his boatload of cash to use.

This team could win now and for the next 10 years, or until Bogut/Horford run out of steam. They're the key. Add one star to them and we'd always be contenders -- Joe now and who knows later?

We spend $3 million more this year - right up to but not over the LT - and about $8 million over the LT the next year. How is that too much? We'd still not be spending as much as MIL is spending this year ... or CHAR or DET or IND or PHI or GS or HOU or MEM or NO or POR -- and I'm just naming the teams I think are below us.

I'm just amazed. I thought that getting Bogut would make any Hawks fan's mouth water. I look over at the Hawksqawk board and they're saying that MIL would never agree to this deal, yet over here we're saying it's too expensive for us.