RealGM

I know the offseason is the last thing on Hawks fans minds right now, but do the Hawks plan to bring Mike Bibby back and if not, who are his potential replacements?

No one has any idea what Bibby is going to get in FA. of course whether he comes back depends on what kind of contract he gets.

What if he wanted more than the MLE for three years, would Atlanta give it to him?

Since there are few teams that can offer him more than the MLE thats generally the thought as to what the Hawks should offer. Say 3 years and 21 million. I just can't see anyone offering him more than that.

I think the dollar value will be a little higher than 3yr/21M, but not outrageously so (3/25). The key is not to go 5 years with him like the Clippers did with Baron Davis. That is far too long of a commitment to someone of that age

The way the cap rules are structured the Hawks really need to keep him because the cap holds of Marvin and Josh Childress prevent any substantial free agent hunting.

BTW, this exchange raised Bibby's stock in my eyes:

Hawks coach Mike Woodson roasted him for passing the ball to Smith in the corner on in the final seconds. As Smith’s 24-footer bounced off the rim with 10.9 seconds left, Woodson jumped Bibby’s case for making the pass.

The surprise was Bibby’s response. He jumped Woodson right back, much to the delight of those of us sitting close enough to hear the entire exchange.

“If you don’t want me to throw to him put him somewhere else,” Bibby shouted. “He’s wide [@*&$%] open. Wide open. What do you want me to do? If you don’t want him shooting that then put him somewhere else. You tell him.”

link

Dallas- Personally I think that once you are getting into the 8 million dollars a year range that the Hawks would prefer to bring in Iverson for the MLE.

One Love wrote:I have been very busy therefore haven't made many posts over the last 10 months but if you recall I dropped the Kidd and JO information while it was brewing... I have been informed that Bibby wants to join the Lakers next year (MLE) and his people have already reached out to our staff and the feelings are mutual... He wants to make a run at a championship with Kobe & Company... Farmar will be traded for a draft pick (apparently New Orleans and Miami are the frontrunners) given PJ's stance... PJ doesn't like the way Farmar "shoots first" and "passes second" and has a predisposition for veteran palyers...

On another note, I tried to get a read on LO and all I get is that Buss will try to keep the team together if they "win" but the general consensus is that LO will not return given salary CAP issues... Kobe will take $20 million over 5 years...

this comes from a poster at the LA boards. the people there consider him as an insider.

killbuckner wrote:Dallas- Personally I think that once you are getting into the 8 million dollars a year range that the Hawks would prefer to bring in Iverson for the MLE.

I just don't get the fascination with Iverson. I know he has the tools to play PG, but he's not shown that he's willing to adjust his game enough. And to be honest, he's not good enough to play his old style and still be a winner. Hiring Iverson might add some box office sizzle (although I would expect that to diminish rapidly) at the expense of trying to be more competitive.

It's possible that Bibby after a very good contract year and even better post season (so far) might get priced out of Atlanta's range, but I think the number to do that would be even higher (around 10M per). If that happens there will be other ways to fill the position before resorting to a gimmick hire like an aging Iverson.

And to work in the above post, the same holds if Bibby is willing to take the MLE to join one of the current elite teams. The full MLE with raises for 3 years is likely to be between 16M and 18M. If he's willing to pass up on 7M+ to leave then so be it, but I wouldn't make the decision easier by drawing a line in the sand at 21M. Also, regardless of the Laker insider, I would see Portland as the main suitor for Bibby's services as they look for veteran influence at PG to compliment Brandon Roy in the back court. They can renounce Channing Frye (almost a given) and maybe make another move if necessary to create room to outbid Atlanta and LA for Bibby if they desire.

evildallas wrote:

killbuckner wrote:Dallas- Personally I think that once you are getting into the 8 million dollars a year range that the Hawks would prefer to bring in Iverson for the MLE.

I just don't get the fascination with Iverson. I know he has the tools to play PG, but he's not shown that he's willing to adjust his game enough. And to be honest, he's not good enough to play his old style and still be a winner. Hiring Iverson might add some box office sizzle (although I would expect that to diminish rapidly) at the expense of trying to be more competitive.

It's possible that Bibby after a very good contract year and even better post season (so far) might get priced out of Atlanta's range, but I think the number to do that would be even higher (around 10M per). If that happens there will be other ways to fill the position before resorting to a gimmick hire like an aging Iverson.

I don't see the Iverson thing happening. I'm not sure if Sund is a panic move kind of guy, but thats the sort of thing that would seem like.

As far as insiders from other teams, I'm generally hesitant to accept their credentials on face value -- remember that joker from the C's board?

killbuckner wrote:Dallas- Personally I tMhink that once you are getting into the 8 million dollars a year range that the Hawks would prefer to bring in Iverson for the MLE.

That's right, but now that the team succeeded to make the playoffs last year and win a first round this year, both with Bibby as starting PG, I see the owners preferring Bibby at 8M than gamble on Iverson at 5 or 6M.

OK, it will add lots of marketing money, but at the price of a huge risk.
If Iverson was able to come of the bench, I could see a backcourt cover by Bibby/Iverson/Johnson, especially if Murray goes somewhere else. Bibby at 7M + Iverson at MLE is still lower than what Bibby gets this season. So even with Marvin at 9M, it would not cost more than what Bibby and Marvin gets now.

I still hope we will be able to keep both Bibby and Marvin (or sign-&-trade one or both), and use the MLE on another big, for an amount of nearly what Bibby and Marvin get this season (21M).
We would still be under the tax, but with a better team.

Dallas- I am not saying that is what I prefer happen- I think thats what the ownership would do. The marketing draw for Iverson at less money than bibby would be an easy call for the ownership. They could just wave their hands and say that bibby wanted too much money and we replaced him with a hall of famer face of the franchise for less money and the fans would love the move. Season tickets would increase dramatically.

And honestly I don't at all think that Bibby is going to be worth 8 million dollars a year for the next 3 years. He declined 3 years in a row prior to this one and in his contract year he dramatically increased his level of play. I think he is due to regress to the mean next season.

It doesn't sadden that you think the owners are enamored with AI. It saddens me that you might be right.

I'm still a fan of either acquiring Kirk Hinrich (Chicago needs financial flexibility, but he may be unattainable) or Steve Blake (in a sign & trade with Portland, hoping they covet Bibby that much) and drafting a PG of the future to take over in the next couple years. However, I think either of those moves is a long shot. I think that ownership will go to the 25M mark for Bibby's service in hopes of maintaining the course of progress. If they lose out on Bibby for either more money or the LA theory, then I suspect they sign Flip Murray to start and attempt to identify a bench scoring replacement option. Much like you it isn't what I prefer to happen, but rather what I expect ownership to do.

Also, I can see your case about Bibby over the next 3 years being risky. It hard for me to predict his performance in that time frame. If he is happy, healthy, and dedicated, the first 2 years could still be very productive and his experience is very valuable at playoff time. If disgruntled or banged up he could be a poor investment. I doubt he'd be as worthless as Speedy Claxton, but not worth the full salary.

I wouldn't trade for Blake, as ANY price would be too much. I would, however, "grudgingly" take him as a throw-in in a bigger trade with POR. To me, he's just not valuable enough to spend any capital on.

Hinrich would help us, especially on defense, but he's "just a guy" offensively.

Another problem is, we're probably going to find it hard to SNT Bibby, except in a blockbuster trade, because we have only 4 trade-able assets this offseason: our pick, Smoove, Horford and Joe.

parson wrote:I wouldn't trade for Blake, as ANY price would be too much. I would, however, "grudgingly" take him as a throw-in in a bigger trade with POR. To me, he's just not valuable enough to spend any capital on.

Hinrich would help us, especially on defense, but he's "just a guy" offensively.

Another problem is, we're probably going to find it hard to SNT Bibby, except in a blockbuster trade, because we have only 4 trade-able assets this offseason: our pick, Smoove, Horford and Joe.

My idea on Blake was him and either Outlaw (preferred) or Webster in the S&T for Bibby. Blake is affordable one year guy fill in if the Hawks draft a PG who would be ready to step in the following year. I wouldn't want to build with Blake long term, but I can live with the stopgap. Bibby doesn't have to be bundled with anyone in that scenario and the small salary difference can be absorbed by them given they do have some cap room.

Hinrich is a better long term piece because of his defense and he doesn't have to an offensive superstar just able to hit the open shot (he's a career 38% 3 point shooter) and run some offensive sets (he's proven he can run an effective pick and roll). He's paid a little more than I would like, but he's more likely to be solid in year 3. Hinrich is probably a pipe dream as the Bulls figure to want more than 2010 cap relief in return for him. Before he was given a chance to show his worth he was almost had for cap relief (Minnesota), now that he's performed in the playoff series against Boston I think he's gotten more attention and will garner better trade offers.

I think the Hawks should let go of him and sign a decision maker instead of a scorer.

Could we do a SnT with the Lakers (if we really think we can't bring Bibby back) and get Brown and Powell/Mbenga... That would also save us money to spend on another FA... I think that in the less competitive east, all of those guys could be solid bench players.

realfung wrote:I think the Hawks should let go of him and sign a decision maker instead of a scorer.

Such as who?

Is Acie Law still considered a PG of the future in Atlanta? Has he fallen out of favor with most fans or the team in that regard?

If I wasn't able to trade him before the start of the season then I would decline Acie's 4th year team option. I think that he would have more value as a 2.2 million dollar expiring contract than as a backup Guaranteed 3 million dollars for 2010.

Would they be looking at assets for him, or is he just more of a dead weight contract there? I was just trying to "think outside the box" a bit on PGs for the Blazers. We've basically rehashed the same old names over and over and over, Bibby, Hinrich, etc., so I was trying to think of players that potentially could be a buy low type of prospect, that doesn't fit with their current team, and I thought of him, but didn't know what it might actually take to get him. If they would look to just dump him to clear that extra 2 million to help in re-signing Bibby or Williams?