As Josh Childress adjusts to being a trailblazer (but not an NBA TrailBlazer) and deals with the fallout from Atlanta fans and potentially NBA fans, his people have decided that they should get Josh out there to talk about why he left and the whole process.
Yesterday, he spoke with PTI, who likely would have NEVER had him as a Five Good Minutes guest had not been "the first" to dump the NBA for Greece in his prime and as a starter caliber player in the league.
He then went on Atlanta's 790 the Zone to talk more specifically about the Hawks and the negotiations.
***UPDATE*** The interview is up on the Zone webpage.
Talking with the "Mayhem in the AM" crew, Childress talked about the slow negotiations, below MLE offers from the team, and sign and trades that the Hawks weren't interested in that would have paid Childress what he needed.
In the end, he had the well reported 5 yr, 33 million dollar offer and accepted it, only to be told to hold on. For a player that had already held on for too long (in his mind---and perception is reality), it was too much and he took his game overseas.
During the conversation with the Zone, Childress also discussed a point that THHB brought up last year during our interview with Childress---the lack of being a starter and the playing time that went with it.
This was CLEARLY something that Josh was interested in and was not afforded. Despite injuries on the team last season to other players, Childress started zero games for the Hawks. He was never allowed to earn the role, no matter how hard he played, and this bothered him as he talked to us last season.
But the headline of the call, the one thing we hadn't heard is that this lack of starting also led to a disrepctful attitude toward him by his own teammates.
He felt cut by the labels that was placed on him. "The Energy Guy", the "Rebound Guy", and so on. It was clear he felt he had already been pigeonhold and that bothered him as well, and likely made it eaiser for him to take the money and run.
Which players dissed him? Which players wouldn't throw him the ball if he was open? Is he talking about Johnson, Bibby, or even Josh Smith?
Along with what trade offers might have been turned down by the Hawks, this is the missing information most enquiring minds are eager to know.
On the PTI interview, maybe it was the newness of the whole thing, buit Childress did not seem invested in the decision. He admitted to being an NBA dreamer, but that he is on that team now and thier goal is the Euro Championship, so he is too.
He is definately still down with the NBA.
But what neither the PTI guys nor the Zone guys asked Chill was if he saw this as a 3 year commitment, or will his representation continue to keep their legs in the NBA waters, feeling out a scenario that will bring Chilldress back to the NBA next season.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Bird Seed: Kwame Signs--But Not as a Hawk and RFA Signings (and Tradings?)
So how's everybody's offseason? Good?
No?
Mine either--but let's get to it.
Kwame Brown signs with the Pistons
Ever notice how some organizations always seem to do the right thing?
OK, so signing Kwame Brown isn't the equivalent of drafting Joe Dumars over Jon Koncak, but signing the big guy to a 2 year, 8 million dollar deal would sure have looked sweet if it had the Hawks logo associated with it.
Instead, the home team will have to settle for the likes of Randolph Morris, who has not shown any athleticism or defense in his time at Kentucky or with the Knicks. His college/pro career to date makes Kwame Brown's seem accomplished.
Personally, I would have rather seen the Hawks save the money they spent on Mo Evans, and up the ante to sign Kwame, who still has the potential to be effective inside, if only on defense, blocking shots, and putbacks.
To be honest, this offseason so far has had the HHB wondering about the approach the team is taking to their payroll and acquiring talent.
The Cincinnati Reds, before the 2005 season, had some money to spend for free agency. They looked about at the high priced players available and decided that they couldn't spend "that kind of money" on a front line player. After the free agent season had subsided, they bragged about how they spent about 20 million dollars in free agency that offseason, but instead of purchasing one player, they were able to acquire 5 or 6 players. Much better, they said.
Eric Milton, Joe Randa, Ramon Ortiz, Ben Weber, Rich Aurilia, Kent Mercker, and David Weathers.
The Reds--not much better.
So, instead of getting an impact player, they wasted their money on 6 players who had little overall effect on the team, except for negative: glorified replacement level players whose main talent was that they were average for other teams at some point in their career.
So it is with held breath that we watch the Hawks attack this offseason with the same approach---taking the discount route, but still spending more than they should on replacement level players.
We will see if the Hawks do indeed sign Morris, if it's more than the 800K or so he earned with the Knicks last season. If it is, they likely will have overpaid, just like they did for Evans.
Personally, we would rather overpay big for a player that will make a positive difference on the team (Childress, Smith), than for a collection of replacement level players at a cheaper, yet more than replacement level pay.
Some teams don't go that route---we call them winners. Some teams, like the aforementioned Reds, keep on trucking down the same path---we don't call them winners.
Warriors are scared Childress; Sign RFAs Ellis, Biedrins
Count the Warriors as a team that blinked and quickly put away their two RFA's, guard Monta Ellis and center Andres Biedrins, in light of the departure of Josh Childress to the land of Far, Far Away.
Oakland obviously considered the pair to be productive and thus important to lock them down, and they were right.
Ellis put points on the board last year (over 20 ppg), but he was also efficient while doing so, scoring a 19 PER, according to basketball-reference.com, and taking down 21.3 offensive win shares to boot.
Biedrins was equally productive, putting a 19+ PER on the board as well.
Oakland paid about 21 million for the pair annually, a high price, but at least they paid folks who were making a seriously positive impact on the team.
So now the attention turns to someone who put up about the same level of productivity as Ellis and Biedrins---Josh Smith.
Will the Hawks sign their RFA to a similar 6 year 60-66 million dollar deal or attempt to go the Reds route, crying poor and dealing for a gaggle of less productive, yet still somewhat highly paid talent?
Sekou Smith of the AJC teased us over the weekend by running a blind item about a powerhouse Western team and a big team in the East having significant enough interest to have a couple of powerhouse deals out there to the Hawks in a potential Sign And Trade for Smith.
One name that has been floated out often enough is that of Mavericks forward Josh Howard. Two years ago, Howard's star was on the rise after his year 25 season, but now two years later, and one year into a 4-yr, 40 million dollar extension, he is on the block.
It would be an interesting economic move; acquire someone with 3 years left on their deal instead of having to be on the hook for 6 more years at the same prices.
Howard put up a similarly productive season as Smith, with an 18.2 PER and similar amount of win shares for the season. But looking closer one sees that Howard is 5 years older than Smith and two inches shorter to boot. Losing the flexibility that Smith provides on the court matchup wise by losing that height and the potential for growth that Smith still holds looks to be too much to lose for the Hawks.
It may surprise you that the Lakers' Lamar Odom is only a year older than Howard. But he has maintained a level of productivity that, while being helpful to the Lakers, is less than what Smith already provides for the Hawks.
Truth is, if the Hawks are indeed entertaining trading a 22 year old, already highly productive player, it had better be for something that the team really needs: A center or a point guard.
The Hawks can ill afford to make a deal involving a valuable asset such as Smith for 75 cents on the dollar, for older players that Smith has already matched in terms of production, and at positions that the Hawks really don't need (read: swingmen).
No?
Mine either--but let's get to it.
Kwame Brown signs with the Pistons
Ever notice how some organizations always seem to do the right thing?
OK, so signing Kwame Brown isn't the equivalent of drafting Joe Dumars over Jon Koncak, but signing the big guy to a 2 year, 8 million dollar deal would sure have looked sweet if it had the Hawks logo associated with it.
Instead, the home team will have to settle for the likes of Randolph Morris, who has not shown any athleticism or defense in his time at Kentucky or with the Knicks. His college/pro career to date makes Kwame Brown's seem accomplished.
Personally, I would have rather seen the Hawks save the money they spent on Mo Evans, and up the ante to sign Kwame, who still has the potential to be effective inside, if only on defense, blocking shots, and putbacks.
To be honest, this offseason so far has had the HHB wondering about the approach the team is taking to their payroll and acquiring talent.
The Cincinnati Reds, before the 2005 season, had some money to spend for free agency. They looked about at the high priced players available and decided that they couldn't spend "that kind of money" on a front line player. After the free agent season had subsided, they bragged about how they spent about 20 million dollars in free agency that offseason, but instead of purchasing one player, they were able to acquire 5 or 6 players. Much better, they said.
Eric Milton, Joe Randa, Ramon Ortiz, Ben Weber, Rich Aurilia, Kent Mercker, and David Weathers.
The Reds--not much better.
So, instead of getting an impact player, they wasted their money on 6 players who had little overall effect on the team, except for negative: glorified replacement level players whose main talent was that they were average for other teams at some point in their career.
So it is with held breath that we watch the Hawks attack this offseason with the same approach---taking the discount route, but still spending more than they should on replacement level players.
We will see if the Hawks do indeed sign Morris, if it's more than the 800K or so he earned with the Knicks last season. If it is, they likely will have overpaid, just like they did for Evans.
Personally, we would rather overpay big for a player that will make a positive difference on the team (Childress, Smith), than for a collection of replacement level players at a cheaper, yet more than replacement level pay.
Some teams don't go that route---we call them winners. Some teams, like the aforementioned Reds, keep on trucking down the same path---we don't call them winners.
Warriors are scared Childress; Sign RFAs Ellis, Biedrins
Count the Warriors as a team that blinked and quickly put away their two RFA's, guard Monta Ellis and center Andres Biedrins, in light of the departure of Josh Childress to the land of Far, Far Away.
Oakland obviously considered the pair to be productive and thus important to lock them down, and they were right.
Ellis put points on the board last year (over 20 ppg), but he was also efficient while doing so, scoring a 19 PER, according to basketball-reference.com, and taking down 21.3 offensive win shares to boot.
Biedrins was equally productive, putting a 19+ PER on the board as well.
Oakland paid about 21 million for the pair annually, a high price, but at least they paid folks who were making a seriously positive impact on the team.
So now the attention turns to someone who put up about the same level of productivity as Ellis and Biedrins---Josh Smith.
Will the Hawks sign their RFA to a similar 6 year 60-66 million dollar deal or attempt to go the Reds route, crying poor and dealing for a gaggle of less productive, yet still somewhat highly paid talent?
Sekou Smith of the AJC teased us over the weekend by running a blind item about a powerhouse Western team and a big team in the East having significant enough interest to have a couple of powerhouse deals out there to the Hawks in a potential Sign And Trade for Smith.
One name that has been floated out often enough is that of Mavericks forward Josh Howard. Two years ago, Howard's star was on the rise after his year 25 season, but now two years later, and one year into a 4-yr, 40 million dollar extension, he is on the block.
It would be an interesting economic move; acquire someone with 3 years left on their deal instead of having to be on the hook for 6 more years at the same prices.
Howard put up a similarly productive season as Smith, with an 18.2 PER and similar amount of win shares for the season. But looking closer one sees that Howard is 5 years older than Smith and two inches shorter to boot. Losing the flexibility that Smith provides on the court matchup wise by losing that height and the potential for growth that Smith still holds looks to be too much to lose for the Hawks.
It may surprise you that the Lakers' Lamar Odom is only a year older than Howard. But he has maintained a level of productivity that, while being helpful to the Lakers, is less than what Smith already provides for the Hawks.
Truth is, if the Hawks are indeed entertaining trading a 22 year old, already highly productive player, it had better be for something that the team really needs: A center or a point guard.
The Hawks can ill afford to make a deal involving a valuable asset such as Smith for 75 cents on the dollar, for older players that Smith has already matched in terms of production, and at positions that the Hawks really don't need (read: swingmen).
Friday, July 25, 2008
Losing Josh Childress, Gaining Maurice Evans
Aside from that, how was the play?
So now we move on.
Separating the basketball part of Losing Josh Childress from the infrastructural part is both easy and hard.
You can justify the millions of reasons why it made sense to let Chill ride off into the Grecian sunset, but you can't divorce the way the Hawks seemed to have handled the whole thing.
But---since we spent yesterday mourning and promised to move on to the hardcourt part of the equation, we will.
But we can't forget---and something tells us we won't be allowed to, either.
So, what does Losing Josh Childress mean for the Hawks in terms of wins and losses? How does a player who this writer always considered to be a role player (albeit a good and productive role player) have a significant impact on the team's fortunes for next season?
For those who want to wax rhapsodic about the emotional part of looking over and not seeing #1's trademark afro I say that will not carry over at all next season. As soon as the ball is tossed up in the first game, that part of Losing Josh Childress will cease to exist.
The on the court game, however, will be noticed.
At 6'8, Childress provided a very long defense along the perimeter and excellent rebounding from the 2/3 position that he was asked to man coming off the bench. He scored without needing a play run for him through his hustle and excellent length and athleticism. He even ran the point a bit for the team after the Bibby deal and Mike's subsequent injury.
Statistically, according to ESPN's John Hollinger's PER system, Childress ranked 9th among all small forwards last season (17.84), between Josh Howard and a resurgent Hedo Turkoglu and ahead of such names as Gerald Wallace, Andrei Kirilenko, Luol Deng, Kevin Durant, and Tayshaun Prince.
Although he averaged 29.9 mpg (a major thorn in his paw, by the way), and having to adjust to the uncertainty of coming off the bench, he managed to be very productive and efficient in his time on the floor.
He was one of a few players in the backcourt area that could average 50% FG and 80% FT shooting, and given the grief he took about his shooting style, them's some good numbers. Good things happened when Chill was on the floor, as his 82games.com Roland Rating was one of only three Hawks with a positive rating (Johnson, Smith).
He was/is a glue guy, a player who supplements the contributions of the core players. The best do this efficiently and consistently, just like Childress.
Now, how much to pay a glue guy has been defined by deals to Shane Battier (6/36, 11.69 PER), and most recently James Posey (4/25, 12.08 PER), so one could say that Childress' supersized Euro offer was more than the Hawks should have paid, but one look at the numbers he put up and the numbers of his supposed contemporaries and maybe we labeled the guy too fast.
At any rate, Losing Josh Childress will be felt---but it will mostly on the court as the Hawks will scramble to replace that key production off the bench.
Hawks Sign Mo Evans
Billed as the replacement for Josh Childress at a bargain price (3 years and 7.5 million), Evans is a considerably less productive player than the man he replaces.
Shorter (6'5 to Childress' 6'8), and older (30 to 25) Evans must now try to fill the shoes of the ultra-efficient sixth man. To compare, Evans had a 13.96 PER according to Hollinger and that was close to his previous season high two years prior.
His shooting is considerably worse than Childress. His career high of .481 was 90 points less than Childress. 90 points. Wow.
Across the board, Evans' rate numbers are worse than Childress. He is said to be a tenacious defender, thereby making up for some offensive shortcomings but his Roland Rating was -3.8.
Color us unimpressed with the signing, as it looks like the Hawks replaced a thriving, growing, productive player who could start on many teams with a firmly entrenched bench player, who shouldn't start anywhere.
Realistically, I don't think we can expect Evans to get better with age, and certainly not taller/longer--and his spike last year might have been his last.
To put the next three years of Evans at age 30, 31, and 32 against what might have been the prime of Childress (25, 26, and 27) is to say that the Hawks have some more to do to replace Childress, but if signing less productive guys at a discount prices to fill the minutes is how they plan to do it, it sure won't make people forget about Losing Josh Childress.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
A Moment of Silence
Tomorrow, we will take a closer look at the basketball ramifications of Josh Childress leaving for Greece, but for today, we take pause to reflect and a moment of silence for the good feeling and momentum lost yesterday when the organization lost more than just a player.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Childress----Gone
Well. Okay then.
It what has to be the most celebrated negotiating tactic ever, Josh Childress has told the Hawks to stick it and has taken the Greek offer to leave the NBA behind.
It's jaw-dropping to imagine that this has occured--but to the scarred faithful that are the Hawks fans, it's another punch in the stomach to a fan base that had just started to feel better about itself.
Now, regardless of what you think about the basketball impact of this move, there is a somber mood among the masses---with anger surely to follow.
My heart goes out to the dutiful Hawks staffers that have to try and peddle tickets and make their number---events that unfold like this surely does not drive people to open the wallet.
As we discussed in the last entry, this has an impact beyond the court and beyond the fans ire. What message does this send to the rest of the roster, and to free agents in general, that one of their favorite players, a player whose image was everything you could want and whose skills were widely recognized, has chosen to leave the league rather than accept your contract offers?
More details will surely come out about what Childress can do next year, and the year after, etc. And the Hawks will surely have rights to him, blah, blah, blah.
But, in a Athens minute, the legs have been cut out from the momentum that had been building over the last few seasons. The team has let this happen and must now face the consequences to come, and there will surely be many.
The team has to focus on getting Josh Smith signed to begin to stem the emotional damages on the franchise and to build back a reputation for taking care of their players. It must be a message to the other players that this was isolated and the team does care about keeping this growing core together.
We wrote a year ago that the team was likely unwilling to go far beyond the MLE to keep Childress and that he would be the next good Ex-Hawk. That was with a different GM and before the playoff run, but I suppose the sentiment hadn't changed where it mattered--in the pocketbook.
We just couldn't have dreamed it would be to Greece. αντίο!
It what has to be the most celebrated negotiating tactic ever, Josh Childress has told the Hawks to stick it and has taken the Greek offer to leave the NBA behind.
It's jaw-dropping to imagine that this has occured--but to the scarred faithful that are the Hawks fans, it's another punch in the stomach to a fan base that had just started to feel better about itself.
Now, regardless of what you think about the basketball impact of this move, there is a somber mood among the masses---with anger surely to follow.
My heart goes out to the dutiful Hawks staffers that have to try and peddle tickets and make their number---events that unfold like this surely does not drive people to open the wallet.
As we discussed in the last entry, this has an impact beyond the court and beyond the fans ire. What message does this send to the rest of the roster, and to free agents in general, that one of their favorite players, a player whose image was everything you could want and whose skills were widely recognized, has chosen to leave the league rather than accept your contract offers?
More details will surely come out about what Childress can do next year, and the year after, etc. And the Hawks will surely have rights to him, blah, blah, blah.
But, in a Athens minute, the legs have been cut out from the momentum that had been building over the last few seasons. The team has let this happen and must now face the consequences to come, and there will surely be many.
The team has to focus on getting Josh Smith signed to begin to stem the emotional damages on the franchise and to build back a reputation for taking care of their players. It must be a message to the other players that this was isolated and the team does care about keeping this growing core together.
We wrote a year ago that the team was likely unwilling to go far beyond the MLE to keep Childress and that he would be the next good Ex-Hawk. That was with a different GM and before the playoff run, but I suppose the sentiment hadn't changed where it mattered--in the pocketbook.
We just couldn't have dreamed it would be to Greece. αντίο!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
