Next Steps

[theatlfan]

Ok, it's after midnight and I'm starting to turn the corner from the draft (like Crawford, like Sy... not happy about selling the pick immediately after the ESPN guy was talking about how good teams cash in with those pick... so what does that make us? yeah...). What are the next steps to our off-season?

Listing by priority:
1) resigning JJ: doesn't look good. CHI being able to dump Hinrich means their officially the odds on favorite to retain the services of JJ next season.
2) Chills: the immediacy of this one shoots up the boards now that WASH has supposedly been negotiating a long term deal with him. Look forward to seeing the terms of that deal... or if WASH is willing to deal with us to exchange some salary after taking on Hinrich's deal.
3) FA: There's been some talk of Salmons (if we lose JJ) or a mid-level bug (Haywood?) with our MLE. Personally, I'd prefer the big, since we don't have one (thanx to auctioning off #31... sorry, I did say "starting" to turn the corner... not there yet).
4) Trades: Still seeing Crawford as our best chance to remake our roster. He's pricey, but expiring; he got an award last season; he doesn't fit our new O; we just spent a 1st on the guy who replaces him. Dunno who would be interested (I saw some POR fans with mild interest), but I'd think someone would be willing to return some talent and/or prospects for him.

Thoughts on any of this?

[evildallas]

My thoughts:
1) waive goodbye to Joe. He'll get a near major offer from a contender to play second fiddle to a true max player. He's not an alpha dog in my opinion and I don't want to pay him that way out of desperation. I don't really see a S&T working out for him given what we would likely get back. If we did I think the TPE or picks are more likely.
2) work out a S&T with Washington for Childress. I don't want him back and would gladly watch him walk for nothing, but if we can get something out of it even if it is just draft rights or a future pick then great.
3) Not a fan of acquiring Salmons (unless it is to replace Jamal Crawford after he is used in another deal). I explained this in another thread that Salmons would absorb all the shots that Joe took and if we lose Joe I want a bigger role for Marvin (or for him to go). I'm more of fan of Wesley Matthews as a free agent. If 1&2 don't add cap, then we have enough to pursue Matthews and a big at the same time. If Haywood is willing to come off the bench for 28mpg then I like him. If not then I see Brad Miller as a good get. After that I look at a guy like Channing Frye. My low dollar candidate is Johan Petro.
4) Crawford and Evans are expiring and I'm not opposed to moving them to improve the team. I've not really scouted the league well to see what an expiring can get us. If we don't expand Marvin Williams role well beyond 8 shots a game then I would prefer we deal him to go cheap at the spot. If Rudy Fernandez is still on the market I wouldn't mind getting him to be our starting SG, but I'm unsure what the price tag would be.

I'm willing to take a step back this year to move key players ahead or find out whole isn't worth keeping. I want to play Teague, get more shots for Marvin and Al, and try to fill the starting SG role with cheap, young, and able to defend. We need someone to step forward to stardom for the team to progress and I don't see that happening with Joe or a poor man's Joe (John Salmons) dominating the offense.

We could spend a lot of money to maintain the status quo and still slip into the playoffs just to be the Washington Generals to the better run teams in the conference. That doesn't sound like a good thing to me.

[dpaulh]

I am thinking that Joe is gone, so what about going after Stackhouse, Salmons, and SnT Childress for a center?

[theatlfan]

I am thinking that Joe is gone, so what about going after Stackhouse, Salmons, and SnT Childress for a center?

I agree with evildallas here in that I don't want some "poor man's Joe" to take the shots that Joe took IF Joe is gone. I think that LD is turning the corner from the isolation O that dominated Woody's plan. The types of players that Sund was able to mine (Flip Murray, Jamal Crawford) won't be as successful under LD as they were under Woodson. Could Stackhouse or Salmons fit into this new philosophy? Maybe, but I don't think so, but I do think Joe could... and thrive.

Personally, I'd prefer to keep Chills if Joe goes. Chills has proven to be a low usage / high efficiency scorer for a wing (after rookie season: 54% from the floor; 40% 3 PT; Usage around 15.5%) which would be the type of offensive player that I think would fit well in LD's O. I dunno about his D, but Marvin would take the bigger perimeter threat anyway. From there, I'd look to use the MLE (or part of it) on a big. evildallas suggested Brad Miller; Brendan Haywood has been suggested before. Either would be a nice pickup for us.

[dpaulh]

I agree that it would be good to keep Childress, but hasn't he said that he doesn't want to play for us? Or was it that he didn't want to play for Woody? I think Jamal and Teague can be an excellent guard tandem in an offense with actual movement, and Childress can be himself and roam the baseline. I am interested to see if Teague improves because I think he has a very good skill set as a point guard as long as there are long-range shooters around him. To that note, I also agree with going after Brad Miller who can shoot from outside.

I know I am going to catch grief here, but I also think that Marvin will benefit from a moving offense. I think if Joe leaves, Marvin can average 18-20 per game.

[evildallas]

I know I am going to catch grief here, but I also think that Marvin will benefit from a moving offense. I think if Joe leaves, Marvin can average 18-20 per game.

That's exactly why I don't want Salmons. I've been very hard on Marvin recently (bordering on hate), but a lot of deals with his role. I'd rather we give Marvin the chance to blossom and see if he can to it. As long as we have an older shot-happy SG in the lineup then Marvin is going to just get along (it's his personality) by accepting a smaller role. If paired with a SG of his own age I think Marvin will be more likely to step up into a bigger offensive role. I'd like the SG we sign to be able to shoot 3s and be a strong perimeter defender and be young enough that he fits in with our core. Unfortunately I believe Sund has the opposite thought. If we do go with a vet I would hope for someone who understands and accepts a complimentary role rather than someone who thinks they are going to shoot 20 times a game like Joe did.