The Trade Thread

[sc8581]

As I already stated in a thread the other day, Smith was on the same level as Aldridge prior to this year, LMA was put in a great situation and Smith in about the worst possible for success. We have our PF for the next 3 years we need perimeter players that can shoot and defend.

Smith hasnt been close to Aldridge since Aldridge has hit his prime but you've been way off on Aldridge for some time. Josh was on one of the most under achieving teams in the past 15 years, absolutely loaded with talent & they constantly underachieved & he played a major role in that. For christ sakes, he played next to an All Star big & with an All Star wing. What better situation can you get than that? lol Had you ever seen him play in Atlanta?

If you think Josh Smith at PF is the answer, I dont know what to tell you, connect with some Atlanta Hawks fans & get educated.

I never said he was the "answer" or even an ideal fit, he's here and he's not going anywhere and he's a better fit at PF than any of our current players are at the 1, 2 or 3 so we're are much better off filling those holes this summer. Monroe is also not the answer or anywhere near an ideal fit, no reason to give him a huge contract as well. That Atlanta team had talent but they also had guys playing out of position and mediocre coaching at best, are you blaming Smith for Marvin Williams being a bust too?

I believe you're talking about the 2009-10 team and if you are you should know that Smith was outstanding that year and the best and most efficient player on the team. He didn't take basically any 3's and scored more efficiently than Johnson, they won 53 games then lost in the playoffs because JJ and Crawford stunk it up plus Horford wasn't big enough to handle Howard.

[Clarity]

I never said he was the "answer" or even an ideal fit, he's here and he's not going anywhere and he's a better fit at PF than any of our current players are at the 1, 2 or 3 so we're are much better off filling those holes this summer. Monroe is also not the answer or anywhere near an ideal fit, no reason to give him a huge contract as well. That Atlanta team had talent but they also had guys playing out of position and mediocre coaching at best, are you blaming Smith for Marvin Williams being a bust too?

I believe you're talking about the 2009-10 team and if you are you should know that Smith was outstanding that year and the best and most efficient player on the team. He didn't take basically any 3's and scored more efficiently than Johnson, they won 53 games then lost in the playoffs because JJ and Crawford stunk it up plus Horford wasn't big enough to handle Howard.

Monroe makes 150% more sense next to Drummond & on this team period instead of Josh Smith, its mind boggling how thats even debatable when Josh is having literally the 2nd least efficient year of any NBA Player in the past 35 years. He's literally terrible. You have actually made some points I agree on about Josh cutting down his shots to around 10 a game but 10 years now says that will never ever happen. I also agree he is probably here to stay so theres probably no other option than to keep him but if we let Monroe go because we are stuck with this loser, that will be on the epic failures in our franchise's history.

You're making excuses for that Atlanta team & for Josh, 2 All Stars & Josh as the #3 option & all they did was underachieve massively. & it wasnt one year, that team was together for a while.

Thats not my opinion but rather fact. Ask 90% of true bball heads to describe that long term Hawks team in 1 word & they will all likely respond with "underachieving".

[Clarity]

I like Pat Patterson as a fit for this team if we can trade Smith. Would fit well next to Dre as a shooter for 25 or so minutes a game off the bench.

He can stretch the floor with his shooting and his weaknesses of rebounding and shot blocking don't matter next to Dre.

See, this is the type of talent we need to add to a Monroe/Drummond focused front line. Shooters!!

When Drummond or Monroe comes out at the 4 ish min mark you can really stretch the floor & do a lot of work in that paint.

If we would have understood that last Summer we would be in an entirely different place right now.

[ChipButty]

I never said he was the "answer" or even an ideal fit, he's here and he's not going anywhere and he's a better fit at PF than any of our current players are at the 1, 2 or 3 so we're are much better off filling those holes this summer. Monroe is also not the answer or anywhere near an ideal fit, no reason to give him a huge contract as well. That Atlanta team had talent but they also had guys playing out of position and mediocre coaching at best, are you blaming Smith for Marvin Williams being a bust too?

I believe you're talking about the 2009-10 team and if you are you should know that Smith was outstanding that year and the best and most efficient player on the team. He didn't take basically any 3's and scored more efficiently than Johnson, they won 53 games then lost in the playoffs because JJ and Crawford stunk it up plus Horford wasn't big enough to handle Howard.

Monroe makes 150% more sense next to Drummond & on this team period instead of Josh Smith, its mind boggling how thats even debatable when Josh is having literally the 2nd least efficient year of any NBA Player in the past 35 years. He's literally terrible. You have actually made some points I agree on about Josh cutting down his shots to around 10 a game but 10 years now says that will never ever happen. I also agree he is probably here to stay so theres probably no other option than to keep him but if we let Monroe go because we are stuck with this loser, that will be on the epic failures in our franchise's history.

You're making excuses for that Atlanta team & for Josh, 2 All Stars & Josh as the #3 option & all they did was underachieve massively. & it wasnt one year, that team was together for a while.

Thats not my opinion but rather fact. Ask 90% of true bball heads to describe that long term Hawks team in 1 word & they will all likely respond with "underachieving".

I don't recall ever having high expectations from the Hawks. They were never close to legit contenders. Here is an old article that gives odds for the start of the 2010 season:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_d ... nba,174375

Vegas had them 50/1. I don't see how a 50 win season and being beaten in the second round of the playoffs by the magic was underachieving. They definitely weren't contenders the next year with the Heat, Bulls, and Celtics having way better teams. They lost to the bulls in the 2nd round. Only place they underachieved was the draft, passing on CP3/Deron in '05 and then drafting Sheldon Williams in '06. I think that is where they missed their chance to be legit contenders.

Regarding 3 years of Smith at PF, it's not ideal and I'd definitely prefer 3 years of Moose. I think Moose will always have trade value as one of the best young centers in the game, so we can afford to give him another year or two at PF if we want.

That said, I am not convinced Moose is our long term #2 option and 3 years of Smith at PF is a lot better (imo) than 3 years of Smith at SF. That is going to be unbearable. It's a tough situation. I don't know how Smith would react to coming off the bench and I don't know if he has positive trade value or not. I'm definitely not willing to give up an asset to trade Smith. I think a lot is also going to depend on whether we keep our pick. There are some good PF prospects in the 4-8 range, which could make trading Moose more viable.

[sc8581]

I never said he was the "answer" or even an ideal fit, he's here and he's not going anywhere and he's a better fit at PF than any of our current players are at the 1, 2 or 3 so we're are much better off filling those holes this summer. Monroe is also not the answer or anywhere near an ideal fit, no reason to give him a huge contract as well. That Atlanta team had talent but they also had guys playing out of position and mediocre coaching at best, are you blaming Smith for Marvin Williams being a bust too?

I believe you're talking about the 2009-10 team and if you are you should know that Smith was outstanding that year and the best and most efficient player on the team. He didn't take basically any 3's and scored more efficiently than Johnson, they won 53 games then lost in the playoffs because JJ and Crawford stunk it up plus Horford wasn't big enough to handle Howard.

Monroe makes 150% more sense next to Drummond & on this team period instead of Josh Smith, its mind boggling how thats even debatable when Josh is having literally the 2nd least efficient year of any NBA Player in the past 35 years. He's literally terrible. You have actually made some points I agree on about Josh cutting down his shots to around 10 a game but 10 years now says that will never ever happen. I also agree he is probably here to stay so theres probably no other option than to keep him but if we let Monroe go because we are stuck with this loser, that will be on the epic failures in our franchise's history.

You're making excuses for that Atlanta team & for Josh, 2 All Stars & Josh as the #3 option & all they did was underachieve massively. & it wasnt one year, that team was together for a while.

Thats not my opinion but rather fact. Ask 90% of true bball heads to describe that long term Hawks team in 1 word & they will all likely respond with "underachieving".

Those Hawks teams weren't really all that talented, I'm not making excuses at all, I said JJ and Crawford didn't hit their shots and Horford was undersized. Monroe only seems to fit to some around here because he's young, Smith is at his best taking 12-13 shots per game, protecting the rim and running the floor.

[Laimbeer]

A couple of Celtic fans have proposed Wallace and possibly Anthony along with Clips and Brooklyn firsts this year and possibly the Phil "1st" (which is likely to be two secconds) for Smith.

[Neptune]

Smith for Green, Bass and a 2014 1st rounder sounds like a fair deal. I'll even take Hump over Bass if he's willing to agree to a decent new contract.

Jennings
2014 1st Rounder
Green
Monroe/Bass or Hump
Drummond

[BadMofoPimp]

Smith for Green, Bass and a 2014 1st rounder sounds like a fair deal. I'll even take Hump over Bass if he's willing to agree to a decent new contract.

Jennings
2014 1st Rounder
Green
Monroe/Bass or Hump
Drummond

This right here is very funny. You made my laugh heartily. Go on, tell me more.

[Neptune]

^

[ComboGuardCity]

Celtics can't trade hump.
I actually wouldn't be surprised to see a josh for green and the nets pick.

Rondo
Bradley
Bos pick
Josh
Sullinger

That's actually a good team.

[Clarity]

Those Hawks teams weren't really all that talented, I'm not making excuses at all, I said JJ and Crawford didn't hit their shots and Horford was undersized. Monroe only seems to fit to some around here because he's young, Smith is at his best taking 12-13 shots per game, protecting the rim and running the floor.

The Hawks were loaded, dont even see how thats debatable. 3 All Stars, elite 6th man.. Massive underachieving.

Monroe fits for a multitude of reasons, you guys just get stuck on the jumper thing because the 4 position has moved in that direction in the past few years. On no planet do we want our 4 taking 10 jumpers a game, the jumper thing is really just to create space for Drummond to work anyways. Monroe is elite in the high post, that will create plenty of space.

We would have to actually show interest in looking Drummond's direction in the first place before the space thing for him is even relevant.

We agree on Josh's usage but that will never ever happen. He has the bball IQ of a piece of wood.

I don't recall ever having high expectations from the Hawks. They were never close to legit contenders. Here is an old article that gives odds for the start of the 2010 season:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_d ... nba,174375

Vegas had them 50/1. I don't see how a 50 win season and being beaten in the second round of the playoffs by the magic was underachieving. They definitely weren't contenders the next year with the Heat, Bulls, and Celtics having way better teams. They lost to the bulls in the 2nd round. Only place they underachieved was the draft, passing on CP3/Deron in '05 and then drafting Sheldon Williams in '06. I think that is where they missed their chance to be legit contenders.

Regarding 3 years of Smith at PF, it's not ideal and I'd definitely prefer 3 years of Moose. I think Moose will always have trade value as one of the best young centers in the game, so we can afford to give him another year or two at PF if we want.

That said, I am not convinced Moose is our long term #2 option and 3 years of Smith at PF is a lot better (imo) than 3 years of Smith at SF. That is going to be unbearable. It's a tough situation. I don't know how Smith would react to coming off the bench and I don't know if he has positive trade value or not. I'm definitely not willing to give up an asset to trade Smith. I think a lot is also going to depend on whether we keep our pick. There are some good PF prospects in the 4-8 range, which could make trading Moose more viable.

You must not have watched much Hawks ball (Completely understandable, they always under achieved & they had Josh which has always been a Oh my God did you see that block/Long 3 that doesnt even catch rim type of player). They were loaded for a while & always underachieved, not about solely winning titles but they easily should have challenged a lot more than they did, even they would tell you that.

Your last paragraph is really the bitch of what Dumars did to us. No one wanted Josh last Summer & that was when he could still play defense. He's always been this bumbling moron on offense but in past years he has been very good on defense. This year has obviously proven some of that was due to his teammates in Atl though. I'd bet hes virtually un trade-able right now with that contract.

Realistically the only big in this draft that I would contemplate shopping Monroe for is Randle but he is terrified of the paint, he scares me because as I just said to SC, the last thing we want is a soft big who only takes 14 footers. Plus Monroe works so incredibly well with Drummond in the high/low, if we had any type of coaching that could be deadly. Memphis destroyed teams with the high low, its a major reason why I said Hollins should have been the HC from the jump but thats another topic.

[jakebernat]

Plus Monroe works so incredibly well with Drummond in the high/low, if we had any type of coaching that could be deadly. Memphis destroyed teams with the high low, its a major reason why I said Hollins should have been the HC from the jump but thats another topic.

but why can't josh smith be that high-low compliment to dre? who's to say that hollins can't turn smith around on offense like he did for randolph? that's my main gripe with people who want to dump smith at all costs. time and time again, it has been proven that players can thrive in the right system and with proper coaching. we're not gonna get anything of value in return for smith at this point, so we might as well put him in a position to succeed and turn him into an asset.

monroe will never be able to effectively guard PF's. as long as we pay him top dollar, we'll never be able to fully realize the potential of this team and drummond as he has too many weaknesses that just can't be hidden. smith is actually a very good help side defender who's much more effective when he has to battle with stronger players closer to the basket and not chase perimeter players around a bunch of screens where he is prone to lose focus and ball-watch.

i know i'm in the minority here, but i really want smith to get a chance to at least show that he's still an extremely effective basketball player. he'll never get that opportunity as long as loyer lines him up on the perimeter and forces him to guard much smaller and quicker players.

[Clarity]

but why can't josh smith be that high-low compliment to dre? who's to say that hollins can't turn smith around on offense like he did for randolph? that's my main gripe with people who want to dump smith at all costs. time and time again, it has been proven that players can thrive in the right system and with proper coaching. we're not gonna get anything of value in return for smith at this point, so we might as well put him in a position to succeed and turn him into an asset.

monroe will never be able to effectively guard PF's. as long as we pay him top dollar, we'll never be able to fully realize the potential of this team and drummond as he has too many weaknesses that just can't be hidden. smith is actually a very good help side defender who's much more effective when he has to battle with stronger players closer to the basket and not chase perimeter players around a bunch of screens where he is prone to lose focus and ball-watch.

i know i'm in the minority here, but i really want smith to get a chance to at least show that he's still an extremely effective basketball player. he'll never get that opportunity as long as loyer lines him up on the perimeter and forces him to guard much smaller and quicker players.

Zach had attitude problems, he's never been a low IQ ball player. Hollins just helped him become a better leader. Josh isnt good in the high post & often settles for low % jumpers, he would be the type of take a long jumper as oppose to working for a shot at the rim or a drop off to Drummond. Monroe is the absolute opposite of that.

I dont disagree with what we are probably going to be forced to do in keeping Josh, we have no leverage, no options, no nothing. Dumars screwed us for 2 more years after this year. We can probably move the dipstick as an expiring eventually but not anytime soon.

Josh is Josh, hes a walking mistake on offense & his defense has fallen off the map as well (at both SF & PF).

I applaud your hope but Josh is what he is, hes a 10 year vet now. Basically if it walks like a Duck for 10 years, if it talks like a Duck for 10 years, it may actually be a Duck.

[jakebernat]

I applaud your hope but Josh is what he is, hes a 10 year vet now. Basically if it walks like a Duck for 10 years, if it talks like a Duck for 10 years, it may actually be a Duck.

well what about the fact that josh is having the worst season of his 10 year career? i get the fact that he's a low-IQ player who can be a bit of a black hole on offense (um that sounds exactly like randolph...), but he isn't THIS bad.

let me ask you this, do you think josh smith would play this poorly if he played for popovich?

he needs a disciplinarian. cheeks was too meek, and while loyer is a bit more animated, he just doesn't command his team like a true hard-nosed coach would. hollins would be a very good option to at least lead us into the right direction and get us to play the right way.

[Clarity]

well what about the fact that josh is having the worst season of his 10 year career? i get the fact that he's a low-IQ player who can be a bit of a black hole on offense (um that sounds exactly like randolph...), but he isn't THIS bad.

let me ask you this, do you think josh smith would play this poorly if he played for popovich?

he needs a disciplinarian. cheeks was too meek, and while loyer is a bit more animated, he just doesn't command his team like a true hard-nosed coach would. hollins would be a very good option to at least lead us into the right direction and get us to play the right way.

a bit of a black hole?, the man is the dictionary definition of anti-efficent. He's on pace for the 2nd least efficent year for any player in the past 35 years. To say he is full of stupid would be an understatement.

Josh Smith wouldnt be playing for Popovich, Pop would never let this idiocy happen, he wouldnt care about 54 mill etc. Look how hard Pop was on Tony Parker & thats Tony Parker, he still pulls him if he screws up. Pop would never allow Josh to be anything more than a hustle guy, occasional post up iso guy from time to time. Pop would know what Josh is. However we arent getting Pop, hes never playing for Pop so the point is kinda moot.

There are coaches who see a GM spend 54 mill on a #3 option & make him the #1 option because of the contract & there are coaches who dont give a crap what kind of contract a guy has, only cares whats best for the team.

[jakebernat]

well what about the fact that josh is having the worst season of his 10 year career? i get the fact that he's a low-IQ player who can be a bit of a black hole on offense (um that sounds exactly like randolph...), but he isn't THIS bad.

let me ask you this, do you think josh smith would play this poorly if he played for popovich?

he needs a disciplinarian. cheeks was too meek, and while loyer is a bit more animated, he just doesn't command his team like a true hard-nosed coach would. hollins would be a very good option to at least lead us into the right direction and get us to play the right way.

a bit of a black hole?, the man is the dictionary definition of anti-efficent. He's on pace for the 2nd least efficent year for any player in the past 35 years. To say he is full of stupid would be an understatement.

Josh Smith wouldnt be playing for Popovich, Pop would never let this idiocy happen, he wouldnt care about 54 mill etc. Look how hard Pop was on Tony Parker & thats Tony Parker, he still pulls him if he screws up. Pop would never allow Josh to be anything more than a hustle guy, occasional post up iso guy from time to time. Pop would know what Josh is. However we arent getting Pop, hes never playing for Pop so the point is kinda moot.

thank you for taking my hypothetical question literally and giving me a completely hypothetical answer lol. but my point is this, what coaches has smith primarily played for? woodson and cheeks? what evidence do you have that smith would be just a "hustle guy" under a good coach?? isn't a coach's job to get the most out of the talent he has? there's no doubt in my mind that pop would find a way to effectively utilize a talent of smith's level.

[Clarity]

thank you for taking my hypothetical question literally and giving me a completely hypothetical answer lol. but my point is this, what coaches has smith primarily played for? woodson and cheeks? what evidence do you have that smith would be just a "hustle guy" under a good coach?? isn't a coach's job to get the most out of the talent he has? there's no doubt in my mind that pop would find a way to effectively utilize a talent of smith's level.

haha, my bad man. I just dislike the "what if's". Plenty of players dont play for Larry Brown or Pop & do great. Its absolutely a coaches job to get the best out of his players but how often does that really happen?

Pop or LB would help Josh a ton but he would do a lot of bench riding until he played the way they demanded he would play. He literally wouldnt play for Pop right now with his current style of play.

[paQo the BAWSER]

Monroe's meaning is ZERO wins. He only does his numbers if he can. It's like he don't f***in care about wins. He's the less bad boy type of guy of our history. We could get here Pau Gasol and we could call us The Good Boys.

Obviously I don't like Jennings (Knight over him all time, he was a true bad boy and we got s**t for him and Middleton...), I like Smith with the right coach but he's a zero brain player (like Stuckey, like Bynum, like Jennings...), but his defense and his sometimes good games for me are over Monroe, the definition of anti-competitive. Since he came to the team he didn't get better our team, he's only stats and he never showed any attitude about win or die or something like that.

We're the bad boys guys, we need players like Knight, always hustling and fighting (with he's weaknesses and strengths)

[jakebernat]

We're the bad boys guys, we need players like Knight, always hustling and fighting (with he's weaknesses and strengths)

that's one of the reasons why i want smart in the draft. he just makes plays that win you games.

[kurtis48239]

Plus Monroe works so incredibly well with Drummond in the high/low, if we had any type of coaching that could be deadly. Memphis destroyed teams with the high low, its a major reason why I said Hollins should have been the HC from the jump but thats another topic.

but why can't josh smith be that high-low compliment to dre? who's to say that hollins can't turn smith around on offense like he did for randolph? that's my main gripe with people who want to dump smith at all costs. time and time again, it has been proven that players can thrive in the right system and with proper coaching. we're not gonna get anything of value in return for smith at this point, so we might as well put him in a position to succeed and turn him into an asset.

monroe will never be able to effectively guard PF's. as long as we pay him top dollar, we'll never be able to fully realize the potential of this team and drummond as he has too many weaknesses that just can't be hidden. smith is actually a very good help side defender who's much more effective when he has to battle with stronger players closer to the basket and not chase perimeter players around a bunch of screens where he is prone to lose focus and ball-watch.

i know i'm in the minority here, but i really want smith to get a chance to at least show that he's still an extremely effective basketball player. he'll never get that opportunity as long as loyer lines him up on the perimeter and forces him to guard much smaller and quicker players.

What I have noticed is smith plays best when this team is playing fast paced basketball,smith and dre running up and down the court together and with their shot blocking and defense would make a dominant force at the 4 and 5.It really pisses me off that they didnt at least try smith/dre start and have moose/jorts off the bench.For the life of me I cant figure out why jorts was put on cv status,actually cant even say that ,cv at least sees some minutes.