RealGM

Between the surveys that show the majority of fans are against the max contract for Joe and the pundits willing to call it out as a horrible contract before it even gets signed. The Hawks need to take advantage of Joe's hesitation to either work a sign and trade or pull the offer altogether. Joe might be the best player the Hawks can sign under the cap rules, but his hesitation speaks volumes about whether he can handle the responsibilities of being a franchise's max player. For that kind of money you deserve a player who believes in both the team and himself, not just someone who signed because you could pay them more. I'm not actually faulting Joe for not believing in the teams chances to reach the promise land with him as lead dog. I'm just saying that if he has doubts then he isn't the right man for the job at that price tag.

Please ASG if you read this it isn't too late to withdraw the offer.

I wouldn't withdraw the offer. I would refuse to do a S&T. Why? It sweetens his situation in Atlanta. He can either take $100M somewhere else, or he can take $125M in Atlanta.

Joe knows all about Atlanta. There's nothing to decide if he really wants to be in Atlanta. If there's any hint of reservation (and I think this delay speaks of reservation), then that means he might leave if there's a comparable situation somewhere else. The only option the Hawks have to lower the standing of the other cities in play is to refuse to give him 6 years anywhere other than Atlanta.

This is Atlanta's "get out of jail free" card and they need to use it ASAP. It was a horrible decision to offer him the max in the first place, and with Joe's hesistation ASG would be wise to pull the offer and/or give a deadline to accept. W/O him Atlanta still has a chance at 6th seed in a weak eastern conference, not to mention it will allow Atlanta to use half of the max to find players to makeup for Joe's lost production.

Another way to look at this is if you popped the question to a girl publicly with the biggest ring possible and she didn't say yes. Instead she said she needs more time. And with that time she's wanting to hear what a couple other guys can offer or do first before she settles on your offer. Do you think your marriage is going to work out?

antoekneeo wrote:This is Atlanta's "get out of jail free" card and they need to use it ASAP. It was a horrible decision to offer him the max in the first place, and with Joe's hesistation ASG would be wise to pull the offer and/or give a deadline to accept. W/O him Atlanta still has a chance at 6th seed in a weak eastern conference, not to mention it will allow Atlanta to use half of the max to find players to makeup for Joe's lost production.

I am starting to see things slightly differently. I think that before the max offer the Hawks were in a bad negotiating position. They didn't want to give Joe the Max, and there were plenty of teams willing to offer him more money. In this position the likelihood of a sign and trade with anything of value coming back was small.

However, now JJ has heard the pitch and received the max offer Atlanta can give him. So if Joe doesn't want to stay in Atlanta (for all of the reasons we've discussed), but he does want to get $120+ million over six instead of $90 over 5. So now he will be trying to get teams to do an S&T with the Hawks, so he can get the money. Assuming he's willing to go where the money is (isn't that what happened when he came to ATL?), the Hawks could bargain with multiple teams for the best S&T deal. Longshot? yeah, but it looks like Sund is playing a great hand with what he's been dealt.

Sund and ownership is probably crazy and total geniuses...a fine line like they say. I think Joe basically told them he was gonna leave so they said fine, we'll offer you this ridiculous contract. Now they Hawks can have some negotiating leverage get a S&T done if he's trying to get out of town anyway.

On the other hand, maybe it's all just crazy and we get to keep him for $120M...

You're right Evildallas,
it's time to correct the mistake, and instead of saying him we won't help him in a sign-&-trade, I would take it the other way: say him it's now 96M/6yrs, which is already a good offer at 16M/yr, or that we can try to find a sign-&-trade at what he and the other team wants.
He will find a team accepting the 120M, and won't find it, or if he finds it, we will get something in return.

I already said, there is not much possibilities for him to be signed with cap room.
No team has room for 3 Max, and all the team wanting Joe only want him as 3rd option behind James, Wade and Stoudemire or Bosh.
They keep their cap room for these guys, and Joe will need a sign-&-trade.

By offering Joe this 120M Max, ASG is only increasing his value, and help him convince other team to offer him the highest possible.
Now that it's done, and that ASG show that they wanted to give him 120M and not be cheap, they won't loose their face if they say him it 96M now. Joe had to say Yes on day 1.

My theory is a little bit of a gamble, but unless lots of Stars stay in their current team, I am pretty sure that the team with cap room are working like that.
Maybe NYK could offer Max to Joe if they are sure that James agree to play with Joe and Stoudemire, and that CLE agree to a sign-&-trade.

It's not a secured move, but it's a smart IMO.
Offering 120M from ASG is not smart, and even Joe accepting 120M knowing it's not Cuban that run the team is not smart. Now, if they both ASG and Joe are not smart, there is a possibility they make a stupid things, like signing a 120M offer in ATL

No. The fan's opinion has more to do w/ the perception that the ASG is cheap & won't pay the luxury tax, but they've said they would. Look at it this way: no one is arguing whether NYK should remove their offer. Apparently, JJ is worth the $$ in this market. If we're willing to spend to put the players around JJ, then I see no reason to pull his offer.

BTW, why is there always someone comparing a commitment in sports to marrying someone? No, it's not similar, not at all. If you're marrying someone is a business decision, then you're doing that for the wrong reasons...

^^^^ Fine don't go with the marriage analogy. Think of it this way. On Monday, you ask a girl out for Saturday night to the most expensive restaurant in town. She says she needs to think about it because she wants to see if one of the guys she really likes will take her to the same restaurant, if not she'll accept your offer. On the one hand you still may get to go out with the girl you wanted, but now that you know she's not that into you do you really want to spend all your money on her? You won't be able to afford to go out again for a long time if you do this, so this date better work out. Or would you possibly have a better time taking someone who's not as well known, but really wants to be with you to the Olive Garden instead and still having enough money to go on some other dates as well?

The analogy (even the marriage one) isn't about love, it about priorities and commitment and mindset. If you pay someone the maximum amount possible then you expect them to be enthusiastic about working for you. If they aren't then I question whether you ever get the level of performance that the compensation should bring. Hesitation in this instance is the lack of enthusiasm that will haunt the next 6 years. For Max money you expect to get a team leader as well as a player. How good is the team that's leader really would rather be elsewhere where he could possibly be 2nd banana instead of the main man as long as he still gets all that money?

^^^No, I still can't see it. Another analogy: you have a job and a fiancée. Does looking for another job mean that you're breaking your commitments to your current job? Not really, as long as you're still covering all your tasks and responsibilities, then you're still fulfilling the commitments for that job. If you're actively looking for other girlfriends while engaged, are you breaking the commitment to your fiancée? Yes, there is no doubt. This is why under no circumstance are the situations comparable or even analogous. If you say that looking for a new job is breaking a commitment, then an overwhelming majority of Americans are whimsical flip floppers in which case it'd be hypocritical to point the finger at someone else and say they shouldn't do that - or, at the very least, anachronistic to think that someone shouldn't.

Now, I'm not saying that I wouldn't prefer our star be closer to Dirk who'd accept less $$ and shorter contract length for the sake of winning, but I also can't fault him for not doing it. I wouldn't want to leave a dime on the table when I'm negotiating for my $$ (or any other perk I think I'd want). It would be hypocritical of me to think otherwise for someone else just because he's in a different profession that I happen to follow.