RealGM

Hawks get:
John Salmons
Brad Miller

Kings get:
Marvin Williams
Zaza Pachulia
Speedy Claxton
2009 1st round pick

WHY IT COULD WORK FOR THE HAWKS:
This deal makes the Hawks a serious threat in the East. Salmons is in the midst of a career season and would be a perfect compliment to JJ on the perimeter. His defense is solid and he can be counted on for 15-18ppg. Miller is a savvy veteran center who'd really help Horford in the middle. A 3-man rotation of Miller, Horford, and Smoove would be sick-nasty. They take on salary in the short-term, but save money in long-run since Williams will probably ask for a big deal in the off-season while Salmons is signed to a very reasonable deal for the next 3 seasons.

I don't like the Marvin -for- Salmons part.

The Kings wouldn't do Miller for Zaza, Claxton, and the pick.

I love Salmons. There has to be a contender out there that is looking to deal for him.

I don't think that trade works for us though. And I really don't want to see us lose our first rounder against this year.

I'd do that trade in a heartbeat. Not sure if it looks good for the Kings though. B. Miller is a player that many teams would love to have. Realistcly speaking, I think the Hawks would have to add more players if they wanted to get him. I do not care about the pick specially if it's not in the top16.

killbuckner wrote:The Kings wouldn't do Miller for Zaza, Claxton, and the pick.

I'm not sure if I agree with you yet. There are a couple of EC teams that *might* give the Kings a deal that gives them more cap space (Bulls or Heat), but I don't see those same teams also giving them a draft pick.

I think it's a competitive deal, especially if Speedy is fully insured for next season.

As far as the Marvin vs. Salmons part, know that Salmons has not had this great a season until he was 29 years old. He only has one more guaranteed year left on his deal, so you'd have to be convinced that Marvin will never be as good.

Considering that Marvin is 7 years younger, bigger, a better defender, a better rebounder, and almost as efficient on a better team as a "lower" option, I'd rather stick with Williams.

You would rather stick with williams, but would you rather stick with williams with FA looming over him? He is in PRIME position to cash in and he has 2 shots at it. If the Hawks don't overpay him this offseason then he can take the 1 year QO of 7.2 million dollars and hit UFA in 2010.

The thing is that I agree that Salmons is overrated by many Kings fans- he excels when he has the ball in his hands but as a complimentary player he loses a lot of value. I am just concerned with Marvin's FA.

I think that a contender could easily give the Kings 7 million dollars of cap relief without making them take back deadweight like claxton.

killbuckner wrote:You would rather stick with williams, but would you rather stick with williams with FA looming over him?

Yes. And I don't think the Hawks need to overpay. I'd offer a five-year deal starting around his QO ($45M). If Marvin indicates that he wants to leave some $37M on the table, you up your offer either $1M/season or add the sixth year.

I'm much more worried about Bibby jumping to Portland or Detroit.

The thing is that I agree that Salmons is overrated by many Kings fans- he excels when he has the ball in his hands but as a complimentary player he loses a lot of value. I am just concerned with Marvin's FA.

I think that a contender could easily give the Kings 7 million dollars of cap relief without making them take back deadweight like claxton.

Cap relief? Yes. Cap relief and a first rounder? I doubt it.

I think the Hawks definitely need to offer the Claxton+Zaza+1st deal for one reason at the very least:

It forces other EC teams to up their offer.

Why would marvin sign that deal? in 2010 you think there is any chance that he couldn't do better than a 4 year 37 million dollar contract? So many teams are clearing caproom in order to chase players they have little chance of getting. Marvin has zero incentive to sign a "reasonable" contract from my POV. It only takes one team in the next 2 years to cause his price to skyrocket.

I was looking at how to trade for Brad Miller weeks ago, and thought Zaza+Speedy+1st (maybe 2010) could work.
But adding Salmons (I don't want Thomas or Moore) is a thing I only thought these last days, seeing rumors about SAC wanting to add someone with Miller.

What I don't want to see is Miller going to MIA and help them be a better team, while that's a sure thing he can help ATL a lot, certainly making a good cover of all the bench minutes of Horford and Smith.

It can also be interesting to get a guy who will cost less than what he gets now, once re-signed. Sure it's a little gambling on the fact that both Bibby and Miller would want to stay here. But it can also help Johnson to stay if he see that the 4 and 5 are now at a higher level.


Now, offering Marvin is what hurts me. I understand that the F.A. coming for him, with his high Q.O. is a problem, but we can get more than Salmons in return. SAC would certainly prefer this trade, but I am afraid of Salmons needing the ball so much to be effective.

Maybe we can work on 3-way trade with POR with Salmons to POR and Webster (and filler) to ATL (depends on Webster's injury).

killbuckner wrote:Why would marvin sign that deal? in 2010 you think there is any chance that he couldn't do better than a 4 year 37 million dollar contract? So many teams are clearing caproom in order to chase players they have little chance of getting. Marvin has zero incentive to sign a "reasonable" contract from my POV. It only takes one team in the next 2 years to cause his price to skyrocket.

With all of the highly-touted FA's available, do you really expect teams to be chasing Marvin?

I expect lots of teams with caproom to chase players they have no chance of getting. And after they miss out on those players then Marvin will be sitting there an an UFA in prime position to cash in.

Keep in mind that Tayshaun Prince, Gerald Wallace, and Josh Howard signed multi-year deals worth less than $10 per with the teams holding their rights.

What's more, Luol Deng and Andre Iguodala both signed deals that now look awfully inflated in the current market. With the threat of the cap declining, I could see Marvin being interested in the guaranteed money.

I know I would be.

I would be interested in being an UFA when a ridiculous number of teams are trying to clear caproom for players they know are longshots. Maybe sanity will wake these teams up about the actual chance of landing bosh and they won't try so hard to clear 2010 room and then the Hawks would have more leverage. But at this point to me it looks like Marvin is hitting the perfect storm of free agency. 1 shot at hitting the lottery this offseason and if no one bites he has very little risk in rolling it over and trying again next offseason.

And time will tell on this. I'll fully admit if it turns out I am wrong. I thought that Josh Smith was going to get far more money from Philly (or the Clippers after Brand unexpectedly jumped) and it didn't happen. (Though right now I'm sure they wished they went after Smith instead) I don't think that Marvin has any reason at all to sign for less than 50 million. That huge QO just gives him too much leverage.

I understand your perspective, kb. We also have no idea what Sund thinks of Marvin either...

That said, I still think they will try to hold onto Marvin as long as they can, and I think it would take more than one year of John Salmons to change their minds.