Thursday, June 25, 2009

Money: 2009-10

Assuming the Crawford trade goes through the Hawks would be within $2 million of the estimated* salary cap and $14 million of the estimated luxury tax line while holding the rights to nine players.

Name09-10 $ (in millions)
Pick #191.145
Williams (qualifying offer)7.355
Childress (qualifying offer)4.037

salary info from Hoopshype
2009-10 rookie scale from Hoopsworld

*Per this CelticsBlog post on June 3rd, the estimated salary cap for 2009-10 is $57.3 million and the estimated luxury tax line is $69.4 million.

If Childress stays in Greece, his salary won't count against either the cap or the tax once the season starts. I include him should the Hawks trade him for a player or players of equal cost.

Until they re-sign or renounce the rights of their free agents, the Hawks have the following cap holds:

NameCap Hold ($ in millions)

The cap hold exists so that teams cannot sign free agents from other teams before exercising Bird rights on their own players. (See Larry Coon's Salary Cap FAQ #30, #31, and #32)

  • I think the Crawford trade means either that the Hawks are willing to replace Bibby/Murray with Crawford/Murray/rookie PG or that Rick Sund believes he can re-sign Mike Bibby very cheaply. I admit to having a hard time wrapping my head around the idea of Atlanta Spirit ponying up $19 million for a third guard. Crawford isn't good enough* to make the team appreciably better so what would be the motivation to spend more money to secure a seed between 4-6?
  • I think the Crawford trade makes it somewhat more likely that Marvin Williams is involved in a sign-and-trade that brings back one or more players (perhaps including a young-ish PG) than the Hawks give up. (EDIT: In the comments Aaron brings up Marvin's BYC issues which I overlooked. Consider this bullet point replaced byf one wondering how the Hawks plan to fill out their roster.)
  • This doesn't effect David Andersen.
  • The next Hawks move will be, like the most recent Hawks move, one that I haven't previously considered.
*He's appreciably better for the Hawks than Law and Claxton but those two played just 575 minutes last season. Crawford's league average production won't be replacing them as much as it will replace some amount of Bibby and Murray's league average production.


rbubp said...

Goodbye Mike Bibby. It was nice having you around to tell Woodson where to get off once in a while.

Hello Jamal Crawford. Welcome to the place where the coach constantly talks about defense but doesn't actually expect any. Just be sure to never drive with the basketball or you'll get a quick seat on the bench.

Aaron said...

The possibility of a Marvin S&T is now gone. You had to have Claxton to deal with the resultant BYC issues.

A S&T of Bibby for a younger PG (Blake?) makes more sense now.

Bret LaGree said...


Good catch. I've edited the post to reflect the BYC issues I overlooked.

I hate writing about the salary cap.

thirdfalcon said...

ok, so the cap was at luxury tax line is projected at 69.4 million. Last year the hawks paid out just over 68 million. while league revenue went down last year, the Hawks revenue went up, and figures to go up more or stay about the same given an improving team. So if they slash payroll this year it would be a serious insult to the fans at best, and gross incompetence at worst.

When you add up what we paid Bibby, Speedy, Marvin, Zaza, Acie, and Flip last year you get 34.189 million.

We only need to pay Crawford, Bibby, Marvin, and Zaza, and our draft picks that much this year

Crawford is gonna get 8.64 million, and our draft picks will get about 1.4 million. That leaves 24.149 Million to resign Bibby, Marvin, Zaza, and to fill out the roster with minimum contracts.

And that's just to pay the same as they payed last year. They have an additional 1.4 million to add to that before they get to the tax.

I dunno that just seems doable to me, given the estimated cost of our free agents.

Bret LaGree said...


After the draft, the Hawks will have ~$25 million to spend on the other seven roster spots (less than $18 million on 6 spots if they keep Williams) without going over the (estimated) tax line.

I'm skeptical that ownership will bump up against the tax line, and there's really no reason for them to do so if they're not going to upgrade the roster. Crawford is unlikely to be an upgrade on the 08-09 production of Bibby and/or Murray nor would re-signing any or all of Bibby, Murray, and Pachulia figure to improve the team.

thirdfalcon said...

I think what they are going to do is keep Marvin, sign Bibby and Zaza for about 14 million(combined), and fill out the rest of the roster with minimum contracts. They might even end up paying less than they did last year. The team will probably tread water next year(imo).

However, i think Sund, and the ownership group, see Crawford as an upgrade over Flip with the added benefit that he will play more minutes which will lower Joe's total, resulting in a better preformance in the playoffs.

Add to that the depth that the big they draft brings to the frontline (he almost has to be better than Solo), along with the expected improvement of Marvin, Smith, and Horford, and you have a better team than last year, and one that is theoretically better equiped for a playoff run.

That's what I think Sund's plan is anyway. We'll just have to see how it plays out over the next month or so.

Bret LaGree said...

I think you're most likely right about the plans, though I think acquiring Crawford means that over a certain dollar amount they're fine with re-signing Murray rather than Bibby and spending the savings elsewhere or pocketing it.

I don't think that Crawford is much of an upgrade over 2008-09 Flip Murray and his game will continue to limit the touches Williams and Horford get and thus put a ceiling on their improvement.

Perhaps acquiring a fourth guard who allows Johnson and Bibby to play fewer minutes over the course of the season could increase the efficiency of those two.

thirdfalcon said...

I think your mostly right about Crawford's relative value to Flip's. But I do think that Crawford can play more minutes than Flip and retain his effectiveness. I also think last year was Flip Murry at his best. Where Crawford has room to play better. Also Crawford has something to prove this year so he will (hopefully) be more motivated than Flip would be.

Your 100% right about Crawford taking away shots from Marvin and Horford. But I still hope for improvement in other areas particularly rebounding and defense.

thirdfalcon said...

I do think that we can expect Josh to play better this year. His numbers went down last year, but Profesional sports has a long history of players not trying as hard the year after they sign long-term contracts.

Keep your fingers crossed for him to play like he did at the start of last year.

Bret LaGree said...

In studying Crawford's career, I was surprised to see how consistent he's been year-to-year: his PER has been between 14.5 and 16 each of the last seven seasons, his eFG% has been between 44.9 and 48.3 over the same period and between 47.3 and 47.9 three of the last four. Unless short-first combo guards tend to fall of the cliff at 29, I think it's safe to assume that Crawford will perform very near his career averages next season.