Would we want Pau Gasol?

[Jamaaliver]

He's a 7 foot tall, scoring PF. He's been an All-Star. He is a World Champion.

I propose: Josh Smith & Kirk Hinrich for Pau Gasol?

We end up with the biggest, strongest (best?) frontcourt in the Eastern Conference. A consistent post scorer who takes the scoring load/responsibility from JJ.

We clear out the backlog we currently have at PG. (Teague and Pargo have proven to be a competent combination at PG.)

The Lakers get younger with Smoove. He goes to a team with a veteran coach and superstar who would be able to motivate him better than anyone in the hawks organization.
They get the expiring contract of Hinrich and his defensive prowess for the playoffs.

NEXT year, Horford and Gasol cause fits for every other frontcourt in the Eastern Conference.
Gasol has proven to be an effective postseason scorer in the past. (Remember the last 2010 playoffs against Boston?)

LA has a young frontcourt that can grow into their primes together. A couple of shot blockers to anchor their defense; and another veteran for a deep post-season run.

This season might see us take a step back. But with Horford, Gasol, JJ, Teague & next year's 1st round pick we would be competitive (talent wise) with any team in the league and actually have a legitimate shot at competing through the end of Gasol's/JJ's contracts.

[theatlfan]

*Sigh*

No, we don't want Gasol. It has nothing to do with talent or roster makeup this year. The problem is that for the '13/'14 season, we currently have $40M dedicated to 3 players (Marvin, JJ, Horford) and the other 2 current starters are FAs. Adding Gasol and substracting Smoove would means we've got $60M dedicated to 4 players and we couldn't even come up with a bench.

If we unload JJ in a deal for Gasol, then I'm all ears, but without that there is that we could do this financially and expect to put a product on the floor that would have a fighting chance of being winners... None.

[parson]

Tough choice. I don't love Gasol's age but, then again, his game is brains and size, rather than athleticism, so he'll age okay.

Problem is, we'd want LA to compensate us for the extra years of Josh Smith we'd be giving away ... while LA would overrate Gasol and want US to compensate THEM. It'd be hard to agree on a price.

Would we want him? .... yeah ....

[Jamaaliver]

@theatlfan-

I'm working on possible Marvin Williams trades now. But from a team perspective....HYPOTHETICALLY would we be amenable to trading away the 'GREAT' & untouchable Josh Smith for a fading All Star?

[HMFFL]

I doubt the Lakers would want Josh Smith.

I think Horford would interest them but they'd still want more. If the Lakers would be interested in Joe Johnson to play him at the 3, sure, and I would gladly help him pack his bags.

[Superiorblogman]

Yes, I would take him for Josh or JJ. I actually think a team going for a title is the only way we offload JJ.

[theatlfan]

@theatlfan-

I'm working on possible Marvin Williams trades now. But from a team perspective....HYPOTHETICALLY would we be amenable to trading away the 'GREAT' & untouchable Josh Smith for a fading All Star?

Obviously, you still don't understand. You can't use Marvin to offset Gasol's salary; we already need to dump Marvin (or at least one of Smoove and Teague) in '13-'14 with the current roster makeup. We won't pay the LT this year to get a C now Horford is out, not to mention the fact that we've always needed one - and now you want me to believe that we'll pay it when the tax implications go up? Now, I'll admit that I'm not a huge Gasol fan, but what people aren't saying is that doing a deal like this means we'll prolly have to dump Horford in 1.5 years since no one is going to want to bite on JJ's contract without sending significant salary back. So, any deal along the premise of Smoove for Gasol becomes Smoove and Horford for Gasol and whatever assets we can get in dumping Horford for pure cap space. Sorry, but the deal is simply too short sighted and I don't even think it'd push us past MIA in the 1st place.

[Jamaaliver]

<sigh>

Ok.

You do realize these are just hypothetical what ifs proposed on the site, right?

[ATL Boy]

No Josh is more valuable then Gasol and there's no way I'd trade Josh for an older, and more expensive Gasol

[parson]

Seems to me, theatlfan, that you're assuming we would not pay the LT under any circumstances. Well, if Gasol were that final piece that propelled us to the finals, I don't think the money would be a problem.

So, in this debate, I suppose the answer depends on one's opinion of Gasol's benefit. We'd have a "big 3" - Gasol/Horford/Joe. Would that make us contenders? Ehhh ... somewhat. So, for me, the answer to the question of whether or not we want Gasol is, "Ehhhh ... somewhat."

[joe56755]

not sure if its a good trade for atl , but how about smith and williams for pau and barnes ? barnes is expiring and it gets atl out of the williams contract . not sure the lakers would want williams though , maybe if they felt smith was a better fit than pau they may .

[HMFFL]

not sure if its a good trade for atl , but how about smith and williams for pau and barnes ? barnes is expiring and it gets atl out of the williams contract . not sure the lakers would want williams though , maybe if they felt smith was a better fit than pau they may .

The Lakers would never go for it. Pau Gasol is a much better player, and even with a bigger contract, his value is far greater.

[fuzzy1]

Pau's better than Smith right now, but the contracts we'd have would be ridiculous. We'd have to amnesty Joe really quickly, and then we'd be back where we started.

[theatlfan]

<sigh>

Ok.

You do realize these are just hypothetical what ifs proposed on the site, right?

Guess we have a different view on "hypothetical". In every other thread (and every time I've ever entered into a discussion based on a hypothetical scenario), people discuss the realistic outcomes from said hypothetical event. In this case, the realistic outcome I state is that taking on Gasol without giving more salary, both immediately and eventually, is incredibly short-sighted and would cause great harm to the team down the road - even to the point of having to ship out core players for nothing more than cap room and assets to avoid the escalating LT that comes into play with Gasol's last year of his contract. How does this not fit your definition of "hypothetical"?

Seems to me, theatlfan, that you're assuming we would not pay the LT under any circumstances. Well, if Gasol were that final piece that propelled us to the finals, I don't think the money would be a problem.

So, in this debate, I suppose the answer depends on one's opinion of Gasol's benefit. We'd have a "big 3" - Gasol/Horford/Joe. Would that make us contenders? Ehhh ... somewhat. So, for me, the answer to the question of whether or not we want Gasol is, "Ehhhh ... somewhat."

Not sure I agree. For a team that has approximately 90% of the value of the team in hock, the $$ will never be there under the current ownership. Further considering the sprawling nature of Atlanta, the traffic problems, and the scheduling of NBA, I don't suspect that we'll ever see consistent sellouts at Phillips either. A title would be nice and would definitely help, but I wouldn't ever see us as a team that would willingly pay a large tax figure unless we landed a Ted Turner-type owner who was willing to cut a loss on the team to increase traffic through a local area like the CNN center.

Pau's better than Smith right now, but the contracts we'd have would be ridiculous. We'd have to amnesty Joe really quickly, and then we'd be back where we started.

Even if we amnesty JJ, we still have to pay him though. The fact is that our owners aren't like the some of the other owners in which the cap and LT are seen as nuisances, so amnestying a player is simply seen as a cap move to acquire more talent. For us, cutting JJ wouldn't necessarily mean we could re-spend the $$, since our total outlay is necessarily limited by the financial status of our ownership group.

[fuzzy1]

On a different note, if we were to amnesty Joe, how much would another team pay for him?

Say we get Gasol or someone else, we would have to amnesty Joe within a couple of years. Would someone like Dallas pay 8 million or more? I would think he would command some dollars.