Not a bad Josh trade :)

geeman · Post #1 » by **geeman** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:23 am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_VWnKHMcIQ
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=828802

Denver/Atlanta - Josh Smith SnT
by Wigginstime on Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:05 pm

All of the Josh Smith trades seem to ignore one significant fact - If Atlanta was willing to add 10-12 million to their payroll they would be much better off just keeping Josh Smith. Thats why it seems kind of pointless for them to pursue someone such as Odom, Artest, Prince, Etc.

The rumours says that their is a proposed trade between a western powerhouse. Although Denver isn't a contender they still won 50 games last year which is enough for the media to label them as a power house. As History has show Denver also has no problems throwing about draft picks (aka Kenyon Trade, AI Trade, JR Trade). Outside of memphis, Denver is the one team that can trade for J. Smith without taking any salary back so:

Atlanta Trades:
Josh Smith (snt for 12 mil)

Atlanta Receives
Lineas Kleiza
Denver 09 1st Round Pick
Charlotte 09 1st Round Pick
Denver 10 million TPE

Denver Trades:
Lineas Kleiza
Denver 09 1st Round Pick
Charlotte 09 1st Round Pick
Denver 10 million TPE

Denver Receives
Josh Smith (snt for 12 mil)

Why for Atlanta:
They get young talent and draft picks while taking no salary back. This is much better than letting Smith walk for nothing.

Why for Denver: They get anothing big to help replace the loss of Marcus Camby. This is almost nearly identical to the Kenyon Trade several years ago - hopefully it works out better this time.Wigginstime
Ballboy

Posts: 38
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 3:33 pm Top

conleyorbust · Post #2 » by **conleyorbust** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:28 am

Wouldn't this just put Denver right back in the lux?

CWell · Post #3 » by **CWell** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:46 am

bleh,not bad my a**

evildallas · Post #4 » by **evildallas** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:52 am

I assume that the starting contract for Josh Smith would be under 10M and the average would equal 12M so that the TPE actually works. I doubt that Denver would be keen on the deal though since they gave up a defensive guy because he made them pay the luxury tax without playoff return and they have a lot invested in bigs already.

From the Hawks point of view:
I really like Kleiza as an offensive player, but I don't like the deal. It's a rebuilding deal. Kleiza will be a RFA next year at the same time as Marvin Williams. I would bet that the team loses one of the two especially with Kleiza likely to get an offer or two from Europe. The picks would be mid-round 1sts, so we'd have 3 mid round 1sts (10-20) in what is looking like a weak draft. Maybe we can move up with that to get something good but I wouldn't be so sure as teams normally decide on what the line is for the talent drop-off and really discount pick values below it. Defensively it would gut us next year, so odds our own pick is the best of the bunch as we slide down a notch losing the playoff momentum.

Post #5 » by **roc** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:37 am

I thought a TPE couldn't be part of a package deal.

Post #6 » by **gswhoops** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:15 am

r0cd0gg wrote:I thought a TPE couldn't be part of a package deal.

A TPE can't be packaged with other players but can be packaged with picks.

So you'd have to make two deals - something like Smith for the TPE + picks then a second deal of Kleiza for some scrub.

mattlanta · Post #7 » by **mattlanta** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 10:31 pm

Wouldn't this force us back into the 'rebuilding' stage?

killbuckner · Post #8 » by **killbuckner** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 10:52 pm

the trade works just fine- it doesn't have to be 2 deals. Teams don't have to arrange them the same way on both sides. The only rule is that you can't aggregate the TPE with another salary to give smith more in year 1 than the TPE is for.