The Joe Johnson Sign-and-Trade
 

I'm just very curious. Now that the court has upheld the one Atlanta Hawks owner blocking the JJ sign-and-trade from Phoenix, what happens now?

I believe in a sign-and-trade, technically Phoenix should have already signed Johnson to that 5 year, $70m contract. I don't believe that Johnson was worth anywhere near that kind of money, never mind the 2 1st round picks that Atlanta had to send to Phoenix.

If things remain as they are - Atlanta will not complete the trade - is Phoenix now stuck with Johnson's (likely untradable) contract and will they be forced to honor it? Is JJ a Free Agent again?

No, in a sign and trade, its a type of transaction. Phoenix would only sign Johnson if he was heading to the Hawks.


from http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm
76. Can a team sign a player using the sign-and-trade rule and then say, "Ha ha, we fooled you. We're not trading you!"?
No. A sign-and-trade is treated like a single, atomic transaction, not two separate transactions between which one party can change its mind. The sign-and-trade clause makes the contract invalid if the trade does not take place within 48 hours.

Dola, Johnson is still a restricted FA. The Hawks can still make him an offer, but the Suns get 7 days to match it. JJ's best option for now if he wants to leave Phoenix is either to work out a sign and trade agreement somewhere else(nearly impossible due to cap rules), or to take the Suns qualifying offer, and become an unrestricted FA next offseason. But Johnson will also lose a sizeable amount of money by taking the Qualifying offer.

Thanks Steve!

The Suns did offer a counter offer after the qualifing offer, which was rejected by Joe and his agent due to them thinking he was going to Atlanta.

I'm sure the Pacers will trade Austin Croshere for him. :D

Salary should match, and Croshere will be a FA in time for them to resign Amare and crew.

GO PACERS!!!

:p ;)

HA, double post!

Anyway, while we're at it we can ship Johnathan Bender to Portland for Shareef Abdur Raheem too!!!

WUHA!

:D

I wonder if Belkin would still take the deal if one of the picks were off the table. That might really test is resolve and prove if Belkin is really trying to maintain a self-imposed $32 million cap.

If anyone wants to make a deal with the Hawks, who did they call? Belkin? Billy Knight?

I assume now it is only a matter of time until they find someway of getting rid of Belkin. I doubt the NBA and specifically David Stern wants a franchise to be completely held back by this kind of fighting.

He's already indicated that he would. According to what he's told Chris Dimino on AM 790, he approved the max contract offer, but not the sign and trade.

Looking it over, i think that Knight torpedo'd Belkin. Belkin is right to not want to surrender the draft choices, as the protection on the Hawks pick is just too weak. By 2007 its only top 3 protected. They just arent likely to make the playoffs within 2 years.

That's what I've been thinking, too....it burns me that sports talk in town is skewering Belkin for not approving a deal that, honestly, is a horrible deal for the Hawks. Even if you think Johnson is worth a max deal (which I don't), there's no possible way that anyone could convince me that paying two 1st round picks for the right to sign him to that max deal is anyway beneficial to the Hawks. That's not even taking into account that we already have 1,000 players at his position and what we need is either a true PG or a center.

From the "You can't be serious" file.....
 

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/3875892

A quote from the above article:

James W. Quinn, a lawyer representing the other owners, compared the Johnson deal to the Celtics' acquisition of Larry Bird, a move that led to three NBA titles for Boston in the 1980s.

"This transaction - the Joe Johnson transaction - is one that is critical to the future of the Atlanta Hawks," he said.

I hope this guy is a better lawyer than he is a judge of basketball talent. Geesh

If Johnson feels so strongly about the Hawks, and vice versa, he should just play out the year under his tender offer, and sign with them next year. They'll still have cap room, and wont be giving up the draft picks.

Are they ripping him for not approving the deal or the impression that it leaves on the image of the Hawks management? I agree that this is a terrible deal for the Hawks but shouldn't/wouldn't Billy Knight have discussed this with Belkin before the deal was presented to Suns? On the Hawks' website, Knight is listed as a "alternate governor" along with two other guys. I now assume he does not have the power he thought he had. If Belkin is the guy who has the ultimate decision, you would have thought he would have signed off on it BEFORE it was presented to the Suns. This is especially disconcerting since they have been dealing with Johnson and the Suns since the beginning of the free agency. Maybe Belkin initially approved the deal and then afterwards came to his senses.

I've only heard a couple of people who said that JJ is worth the money. Most are just upset at what this has done to the franchise. It is a mess, and is going to hurt the Hawks and the Thrashers until it gets settled.

The way Belkin tells it (through the guy at 790) is that he was presented with the contract offer and approved it. Then the sign and trade deal came up and they (Knight and all the owners) couldn't come to an agreement and the offer was never approved...despite that fact, Knight told the Suns it was a done deal and the terms were leaked to the media. If anyone appears to be at fault, it's Knight. But he's getting off scot free in the media coverage of this.

IMO, Knight caused the mess and he needs to be fired.

Spot on.

A picture worth a thousand words:

Belkin indicated that he would accept the max contract but he never said that he would if the terms if the Suns dropped the draft picks requirement from 2 to 1. That's what I would be curious about. I'm surprised that the Suns don't want to negotiate.

And why exactly is Belkin more credible than the other 10-12 people involved?

Because only a damned fool would give away the cash PLUS the draft picks to add yet another shooting guard to the Hawks roster.

Knight's draft made his judgement suspect, his zeal for this deal seals it. He should be gone already & probably shouldn't have been hired in the first place.
Hopefully he will be given every opportunity to fall on his sword for JJ, and if there's any luck at all, he'll find a way to take 'Nique with him.

It's tough to negociate again after you were told by the opposing GM the "deal is done" - only to have the team's owner override the trade agreed to by both parties in good faith. I could see the Suns offering to switch a player (a la Donta Smith for the Laker's pick), but I can't see them taking a worse deal given both sides agreed to 2 picks + Diaw deal.

Plus, if you're the Suns, why would you waste your time with Knight? They could agree to another deal (say Atlanta's first, D. Smith and Diaw) - only to have Belkin nix that one as well. The only way I would even talk to Atlanta again (if I were Phoenix) is if either A) BK is removed and replaced with someone on the same page as Belkin or B) Belkin steps down from his role and allows another owner to be the governer (who agreed with BK on the first deal).

Until one of those two things happen, dealing with Hawks is a complete waste of time. Hopefully, they can have this thing sorted out by the end of the week. I would not be surprised, though, to see Phoenix work out another deal with Toronto or New Orleans or even resign Joe on their own before this mess in Atlanta gets cleaned up.

Good Post. Is there any GM in a worse spot than Knight right now. Having 9 owners who have the power to stop deals is nutz. They should just let Knight go and hire me to run the phones. When a deal comes up thats good I will give it to the owners, let them reject it, and continue to be the worst franchise in the NBA.

Initially the response from the Atlanta talk radio shows was 'why would Belkin do that? They need Joe Johnson.' Then it moved to 'well, it does look like a bad deal, but we need Joe Johnson.' Now it seems to be "well, blocking the deal was probably the smart thing to do, but you can't have one guy having the veto power like that, and we still need Joe Johnson."

My opinion is that Belkin will eventually be bought out, forced out, or simply throw up his hands and sell out. At that time the franchise will continually be used as a case study on how NOT to run a sports team.

The worst thing in all this is that there was genuinely a little excitement about the Hawks. The two draft picks from last year, Smith and Childress seem to have given the team a little hope. Marvin Williams added another level of buzz. The $ available for free agency meant that the team could add a few veteran pieces to help the younguns to develop while helping the team improve on last year's abysmal record. In a few years they might be halfway decent, and maybe even pretty good.

This just killed all of that.

Let me play devil's advocate here. Why is it that bad a deal?

The money? No one else was gong to take the money. It isn't like saving the cap room is going to help the team, because no one else was going to come to Atlanta. Also, from what I understand of the deal, the biggest part of the cap hit was this year (when no one else was going to use it), and would go down next year (freeing money to sign someone next year, or even allow JJ to be trade bait if he doesn't work out). Remember also, if you think Knight is an idiot for paying, the Suns are willing to pay the same money for him.

The two draft picks? Does this team really need more draft picks? This isn't football, where you need as many bodies as you can. The team is loaded with young draft picks now. They need some veterans to help this team improve. Using draft picks to pick up a veteran would be a good move at this point.

Now, saying all this, does this make this that bad a deal? Well, it isn't great. BUT, is it bad enough to destroy the team now and in the future with these public shanagins? I'd say no. Another thing this team doesn't need is an owner that is putting a low artificial cap on salaries, and is only in making money and not in winning. From every report, that is Belkin's only interest, and that will not work (for the Hawks or Thrashers).

I don't like the fact that the plan is to get him to play point guard. That seems dumb to me. And it is severly overpaying for the guy.

What's worse, losing out on guys or 2 years from now wondering why Johnson's cap number is so high and throwing up your hands because your cap looks like the Knicks cap?

I've head a few people say that, but I really don't know where that's coming from. If there's one thing NBA players are known for, it that they always go to the highest bidder. Now, if a FA comes down to the Hawks and someone else with max contracts, then I'd bet on the other team. But the majority of players who can come in and help the Hawks aren't necessarily competing for max contracts. That's where the cap room will help.

They don't have room for that contract....they only matched to set up the sign and trade.

Draft picks are draft picks...whether they keep them or trade them, they're still valuable. Giving up two first rounders for the right to sign a player to a max contract is idiotic.

The Johnson signing is not going to make the Hawks cap look like the Nicks. They'd need about four more contracts the size of Johnson's to do that. And again, his cap number goes down next year. The largest part of the cap hit is just this year.

5 years/70 million.

I'm no math genius but that's around 14 million a year.

If he can't play point you've got yourself 14 million worth of an unmoveable contract. He's not going to produce 14 million worth yearly. Not even close. Watch what he does with Nash, Marion and Stodamire.

I mean if you are just spending to spend fine then.

Who are they going to sign this year to use it? Where are these free agents? The way this deal is structured, it would not get in the way of anyone they could sign next year, so where is the problem.


They have to match the contract to keep JJ. They have to be able to sign him to the same contract, or there is no need to trade for him. They have to match the Hawks offer sheet, or the Hawks gets him without the trade.


I agree to a point, but I can also see the need to do something now to have any hope of getting something later. No one is coming to Atlanta, and this guy actually wants to play here.

20 million+ is under this years cap(from what I've heard). I don't know that much about NBA salaries, but would he be closer to worth 12 million a year?

IMO no. Others may have a different view. I'm unimpressed with his game overall. He's a great role player on a good team though.

If the Hawks really want Johnson and Belkin has no problem with the contract, why don't they just offer JJ a max deal instead of trying to work a sign-and-trade? Would the Suns really match a max contract to their 3rd or 4th best player?

This is completely false. First, no offer has been signed by JJ or matched by the Suns. It's as if nothing was happened from a contract standpoint. Second, the Suns have a 6-year, $75 million deal on the table for JJ right now that he can sign at any time (and may end up doing if this Atlanta thing falls through). So, they could easily afford a 5-year $70 million deal for atleast the first couple of seasons of the deal. Now, once Amare's pending extension goes through in 06-07, the team will be slightly over the tax threshold. But, they can let some guys go (Barbosa, Jim Jackson) to get by until 07-08. At that time they may have to trade someone like Marion - but I think Kurt Thomas' deal would end about then as well ($7 mil). So, the Suns could match this offer and be fine for atleast 2 seasons, if not three. It gives them a nice window at a run.

At this point, I'd rather see Phoenix hit the tax limit in 06-07 and 07-08 and make a legit three-year run at a championship with JJ as opposed to piecing together a "nice" team for three years that is setup to be bridesmaid or worse (but well under the cap). In 2008, the team can look at moving Marion or JJ if finances become an issue. The only way I would not want JJ back is if this team can get a decent amnesty fill-in (a la Finley) and get a nice package from Atlanta to re-arm in the near future. And, it seems that the Atlanta trade would do that.

Sarver has said repeatedly over the past 10 days that the team is financially able to match any deal JJ gets and that he will do so. That's the reason JJ and his agent have refused to sign any offer sheets to this point. If JJ and his agent believed Sarver was bluffing, they could probably sign an offer sheet with Atlanta or maybe even New Orleans right now. But, if they sign it and Phoenix matches, he can't be traded to the team that signed him to the sheet for over one year or traded to any other team in the NBA until Dec. 15. So, at a minimum, he's going to be a Sun for 05-06.

I'd also really be interested to see if Belkin would allow an offer to JJ if he knew 100% that the Suns wouldn't match. I've seen a few things from Atlanta that have said that Belkin simply wanted to sign JJ to the huge offer sheet (knowing that Phoenix would match) so that he could go back to the fan base and say "Well, we tried and were willing to pay him big money" but keep the payroll down. Then, when Knight worked out the sign-and-trade and he knew that the Hawks would be on the hook for $70 mil over 5 years, he freaked and pulled his support. I'd be willing to bet that if the Suns offered JJ for Diaw straight up that Belkin would still balk because his issue isn't the trade (a red herring) but the money to JJ. That's why I don't see why Phoenix needs to even talk with Atlanta on this until he is out of the picture.

That is exactly the picture I'm seeing, Arles. It is funny that I know nothing about basketball, but I seem to understand this deal better than most of the NBA fans on here.

Somewhat lost in this somewhere along the way is the notion of relative value -- as somebody said, JJ does a nice enough job filling a certain role ... but that role isn't the one that he's being brought to Atlanta to play.

Atlanta will be lucky to win 25 games with OR without JJ, so WTF would you pay the guy $70m long-term, or even $14m for a year when suckitude is the outcome either way? What that looks like is exactly what someone said earlier -- spending for the sake of spending. And that's kinda stupid, making Belkin look to me like the only guy with a clue in the whole basketball operation.

Hey that was me! Yay me!

But Belkin doesn't want to spend money, ever. There has to be a middle between over-spending and under-spending (and considering the Hawks could fit whole team's payroll in their cap room, one player's contract is not going to kill them).

No, it wouldn't "kill them", but that doesn't make it a wise move. Again, we're back to spending just for the sake of spending, and I don't see how anybody can criticize the guy for not wanting to do that.

Let's see here ... He's, what, 30% owner? 30% of $70m = $21m.
For a deal that is far from a sure thing in terms of improving the team at all?
Sorry, I don't blame the guy one bit.

20 million is paid to Johnson this year, but his cap value this year still remains at the maximum salary for his level of experience. The Hawks will still have a high cap number for him in future years, it definately won't go down.

Ok, that is not what I'm hearing, but I'm far from an expert on the crazy cap that the NBA has. I've heard this from several sources (that the cap hit is larger in the first year).

I agree with Jon on JJ's value to Atlanta and they would certainly be overpaying to sign him to a $70 million deal (esp playing him at the PG spot). But, I read that Atlanta has to get to a payroll floor of $37 million or they will be forced to pay the difference anyway. Right now, I think Atlanta's at around $23 million in payroll. So, if they were to go into the season today, they would be forced to scramble and sign $17 million in players or forfeit that money anyway.

Given that situation, it may be better to slightly overpay for JJ and atleast get a player with value to get to that floor instead of paying four marginal players $4 million each just to meet the cap.

Someone with "inside information" from Atlanta just came on a Phoenix radio station and says the deal will be done in the next 24 hours. I just caught the end of it, but I think the rumor is that Stern is stepping in on this chaos in Atlanta and will end up facilitating the original deal sometime today.

Atlanta also had a news conference schedule for 3:30 to announce the PF they signed from Milwaukee and this guy said that another "big announcement" will be made there as well. Not sure what to make of all this - but I just hope this all gets straightened out in the next 24 hours and people can move.

At some point, though, either Belkin or Knight will need to be stripped of power/removed for things to be back to normal. Even if this trade goes through, there's no way both can co-exist.

I see what the reason for optimism that the deal would get done is:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2131704

So, it appears if the Hawks ownership goes back in front of the Boston judge, the temporary injuction should be removed and the deal can go through with approval by the new governor (Gearon).
This thing may actually be sorted out shortly.

Although I think this probably does doom Belkin, it doesn't read like a 100% slam-dunk either. Here's why I think there's still some hope for him

when the restraining order was issued
1) The judge instructed the majority of the owners to seek a ruling from Stern, saying that a precondition of any removal was the approval of the commissioner.

But that wasn't the only reason he issued the injunction

2)"In his ruling, the judge wrote: "It is hardly apparent on the present record that the deal for Johnson, however talented he may be, given what was needed from the Hawks to effect it, is in the economic best interest of the franchise. . . . Sometimes the cost is just too great."

The partnership agreement among the owners, signed last year, gave Belkin a five-year term as the Hawks' governor. The NBA requires the team governor's endorsement on trades before they can be consummated. The partnership agreement stipulates that Belkin can be removed as governor if he takes a "legally binding action" against the wishes of a majority of the group.

Belkin's lawyer, John Fabiano of Boston, argued in court that the other partners are trying to remove Belkin for not taking a legally binding action of approving the trade. "If they wanted the wording [in the partnership agreement] to be 'action or inaction,' these fancy lawyers could have drafted the document to say that," Fabiano said.

Quinn argued that refusing to act can be as damaging as acting: "He could sign no players. He could have no uniforms."

The judge's ruling did not address the question of action vs. inaction."

I think there's at least a chance (albeit a slim one) that the judge keeps the injunction in place.

Didn't work out that way. Judge has lifted the stay, and the Hawks are now free to remove Belkin. I imagine he'll be bought out eventually, or he'll sale to someone else. His whole reason to be involved in this group was to own a basketball team. Now, he does, but has zero say in its operation. He'll not last like that.

Just as a follow up, the Joe Johnson trade went through and Belkin is being bought out of the ownership group. That was the only thing that could happen in this case if the Hawks have any hope going forward. Whether the trade was good or not (I doubt it was great, but I also doubt it is going to cause any long term damage to an already bad team. It will probably help somewhat, just not as much help as the price should bring), it had to be completed or the whole team would have to be sold to someone else for them ever to have credibility again.