Would you take on Joe Johnson's bad contract if we got Smith as well?

And the cap would increase by a max of 1 or 2 million.

The punishment for going over the cap have increased as well.

 

Gotcha. Then I would definitely say no to any deal

 

No, it's a short term measure that will hurt us.

 

idk... thats really a horrible contract that would saddle us for the next 4 years... If theyre willing to take KMart/Scola/Sam for JJ and Smith.... i'd consider it...

 

After seeing Joe Johnsons clutch play the last few games, and the 3 to tie in double OT against the purple j*zz just then, YES.

 

Joe Johnson is like the anti-tmac, he performs great in the regular season then disappears in the playoffs (I'm gonna say it so Tinman doesn't derail the thread "at least he got out of the first round!").

Season Averages: 18.9 pts, FG 0.441%, 3p 0.384%, 3.6 Rb, 3.8 ast, 2 TO

Damn, you know what? I was gonna look up his playoff stats since he shot like FG 38% in the playoffs the year before, but looking at his stats this season Joe Johnson sucks. Dude is totally inefficient, why the hell would we want him here, esp. when that contract means letting go of Lee and Dragic? Smith is a nice player but he isn't a franchise changer, certainly not worth absorbing Joe Johnson's max contract. Pass!

 

Tracy McGrady career shooting percentages

.435% FG
.338% 3FG
Playoffs
.430% FG
.301% 3FG
---------------------------

Joe Johnson career shooting percentages
.443% FG
.367% 3FG
Playoffs
.418% FG
.379% 3FG

 

And hear I thought Les' goal of always being competitive, was enough Atlanta, now people want to get part of their roster and really become the most average franchise ever.

 

you all acting lyk atlanta has to beg you on their knees coupled with another blowjob to give you 2 top stars, AND you want a top draft pick on top of that.

Wow, nba teams must be dying to get rid of the joe johnsons and josh smiths

 

Josh Smith sucks , do not want.

 

i just saw the thread title and decided to add my voice to the chorus of ..."are you freaking kidding me?" it's the worst contract in the history of the NBA ...certainly the worst contract in the current NBA.

Hell NO!

 

TMac scored almost 12 points more per game, 2.5 more assists per game, 2.5 more rebounds per game, more blocks and steals per game.

In the playoffs....

Advanced stats - T-Mac PER is 24.7, Joe Johnson is 14.1. Win shares, O-rating, D-rating, T-Mac has a huge advantage

 

NAHHHH DAWWWG!

 

Juwan Howard would like to talk with you !!!

And my answer is no.

DD

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ba...culous-deal-with-the-A?urn=nba,252877&print=1

Thu Jul 01 12:30pm EDT

Joe Johnson to sign a ridiculous deal with the Atlanta Hawks
By Kelly Dwyer
It's never a good sign when, a full week before a player is set to put pen to paper to ink his most recent contract, that a good portion of the NBA community regards that contract as the worst it has ever seen.

Not the worst trade, nor the worst draft selection. And we're not talking about considering Joe Johnson's(notes) new contract with the Atlanta Hawks (as first reported by Adrian Wojnarowski) as the worst contract we've ever seen a few years into the deal, or a few years after it expires in retrospect.

We're feeling this way, right now. On July 1, seven days before he even gets to sign the deal. Worst contract, ever.

It's that bad. Six years, and $119 million dollars for a player regarded as a second option at best on a great team. At best. Johnson will be 29 years of age to start this contract, 35 to end it, so Atlanta will get his one peak season (unless last year's run of over 21 points and a combined 9.5 rebounds/assists was the best we've seen), and then the downfall.

At about $20 million a year.

Bear in mind that Johnson achieved those stats by absolutely dominating the ball for the Hawks. Just owning it, for large stretches, forcing either a potential score or a potential assist to be added to his ledger just about every other time down court. All while playing huge minutes, 38 per game in fact; which was actually the lowest mark we've seen from Johnson since his second year in the league.

[Photos: See Joe Johnson's moves on the court]

It's just an astonishing deal, on so many levels. A good part of me thinks that — because his stats are so inflated by his ball dominance and big minutes — that Johnson will be worth about half of his yearly salary next year (next year!), so imagine how far he'll taper off by 2016? Johnson isn't the most athletic player we've seen, he isn't tricky enough with the ball to get to the line much (a shocking 3.5 free-throw attempts per game, criminal for someone who has the ball so much, and for so long), and this isn't someone who will age well.

On top of that, didn't we watch him age quite considerably in the playoffs last season? Johnson averaged 11.8 points per game in the second round, shooting a terrifying 29.5 percent along the way. He seemed nonplussed as ever as his Hawks fell out of the second round again, and for the second time in five years, he's chosen big offseason money over a chance at a championship.

The Hawks? They're the big boys, here. They're supposed to be smarter than this, and in spite of all the talk about how this team had no choice but to stick with the status quo and see what happened? Bollocks.

This man could be nearly half of your salary cap in a few years. We have no idea how the new collective bargaining agreement will shake out, but even under the ridiculous payroll runs of the last six or seven years, handing nearly $120 million to a 29-year-old who has yet to do anything more meaningful than dribble a lot and shoot a lot and look real tired in January? It boggles the mind.

Yes, you're backed into a corner, and you can't afford to let your best offensive player go without any proper sign-and-trade compensation. I understand that, but signing above what you originally hoped to pay only goes so far. There has to be a cutoff price, at some point, and paying Joe Johnson around $20 million in 2015-16 has to be that point. Hell, paying Joe Johnson $20 million in 2011-12 has to be that point.

This is just an absurd contract that, even if the Hawks ownership is banking on selling the team midway through Johnson's deal as has been rumored, cannot be justified or argued-for in any meaningful way.

There's just no way around it. Joe is a nice player who might get to shoot himself into yet another All-Star berth next season. If he's lucky, the year after that, even. Give it to him. Let the Hawks roll to the second round again, earning the ownership a few more gate receipts as they take yet another first-round series to seven games.

Doesn't matter. As it stands, this is the worst free-agent contract I have ever seen. Roll over Eddy Curry(notes), tell Jim McIlvaine the news.

 

It's pushing it to say they are "top stars" even out of their own division. They're fringe stars. And both are mad chuckers. There's a reason the Hawks are forever playoff fodder in the East. They'd be no (or barely) better than the Rockets over the last several years if they were in the West.

 

Ummm no. Joe Johnson is much better than Martin.

http://www.nba.com/video/games/hawks/2012/03/25/0021100722_uta_atl_recap.nba

 

JJ isn't worth the incremental cost. He makes LeBron type money.