Marvin Williams Por Favor: Part Deux

by irish3 on Jul 8, 2009 8:52 AM PDT

Salary Cap projections just made Marvin more available...

#1) If you check out http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4312837 you'll see that a conservative estimate of where the luxury tax will end up for the 2010/2011 season is $65 million, and as low as $61.2 million...vital considering...

#2) If you check out the Hawks salary structure for 2010/2011 season on http://hoopshype.com/salaries/atlanta.htm... Y

--You will see 4 players "essentially" under contract for that season (J. Smith, Al Horford, M. Evans, J. Crawford) for $24.2 million.

-- Factor in them resigning Joe Johnson for $18 million (estimate), Bibby just agreed to sign for $6 million, Zaza, 4 million (experts say it'll happen) & Jeff Teague 2 million by then, 2010 #1 Draft pick at 1.5 million

.... that's 9 players for 57.5 million dollars!!! All definately under contract!!!

#3) If...Blazers offer Marvin essentially 10 million per (trade Euro rights for picks) year, do you really think the Hawks will match??? If they do, the Hawks best case scenario: 67.5 million for 10 players @ 2.5 million over the cap already!!! Their nightmare scenario...possibly being projected...6.3 million over the luxury for 10 guys and still needing to sign players!!!

#4) Cheap Hawks!!! --> If you go back to that espn article mentioned in the first paragraph, you'll see only 6 teams went above the luxury line this past year, and the Hawks front office has said this is not something they want to see, annnnd they are notoriously cheap...they will not pay a dollar for dollar tax when they wouldn't even sign J. Chill while under the cap!!!

Final Point: I have already given details surrounding Marvin's fit for this team, he is not Travis Outlaw, evidenced by simply pointing out two things: He is not a black hole on Offense & He plays elite 'man to man' defense...If we sign this guy by playing "financial bully" to the Hawks, we improve at the 3, and maintain our ability package Trout & Blake for PG help if we are so inclined...we undeniably improve at the "3" for the next couple of years, and maintain "assets" to package in trades...also, at this point, I don't buy the argument that we'll lose out by having to wait "7 days' to see if the Hawks will match, there is a good chance they won't, and don't tell me agents wouldn't be more than willing to follow KP's advice when he calls them and says "Your guy is #2, or #3, on our FA list right now, don't sign anything until we find out about Marvin, bc we will substantially increase the offer the Knicks, or the Lakers, will throw at you...

Crossing the fingers, bc with PA's money, I have no idea in the world why KP isn't willing to consider this option...I will take a "proven" Marvin, at a "need" area, with "elite" athleticism over a "system" David Lee, at a "no-need" area, with "pathetic" athleticism any day of the week...this is our one chance to add an elite player through FA for the next 10 years...take it...it is ok to overpay for a "young stud" with good character!!!

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 3 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Lets go ahead and make this the Trade Drawer for today

Please edit your title to reflect that so we can get all of the proposed deals in one area. As per the site guidelines, we will start deleting any new trade posts today that are not posted in this thread.

As for your topic, I would love the idea, although with the new cap number for 2010 being projected at $50.4 million and $53.6 million, I don’t even think we would need to offer Williams that much. I don’t believe he is worth $10 million per, but even a MLE contract for him would cost them twice as much.

What this projection also does is completely capsize the idea that the Blazers could have come capspace next year even with extentions given to Roy and LMA. With a cap number around $50 million there is no way this team gets enough room under that next year to be any type of player in the market. Which ofcourse, puts that much more pressure on KP and the boys to get it done this summer.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Jul 8, 2009 9:07 AM PDT reply actions

Marvin isn’t worth ten million a year. He could probably be had for around six.

I suppose he’d be a good Travis replacement, but I would love to have an actual fourth big instead of a wing masquerading as a big.

draft the stache

by Cablinasian on Jul 8, 2009 9:21 AM PDT reply actions

Fourth big would be nice...

But would you prefer a reserve big man over an upgrade at the starting SF spot?

I like Nic’s potential, but he might be the most overrated player on the roster right now in terms of present skill level. He’s not a starting caliber SF for a championship contending team right now – he shows flashes of being that player, certainly, but it happens every 4-5 games or so.

Hollinger had Marvin ranked near the top of his “bargain free agents” column. Here’s the write up:

Marvin Williams (restricted, Atlanta)
Continuing that age theme: If you’re going to dive into the free agent pool, doesn’t it make more sense to add 23-year-olds than 36-year-olds? Well, Williams is 23 and is coming off a strong season, one in which he ranked 13th among small forwards in PER at 16.04 while becoming the Hawks’ main defensive stopper on the wings.

At 6-9, he has the length to harass opposing small forwards, and he added the 3-pointer to his arsenal last season, hitting 35.5 percent. His tendency to fade into the background can be vexing, but on the right team that’s not necessarily a bad thing. And as his offensive game continues to blossom, he could be the quiet gem in this year’s free-agent class. Not that he’ll come cheaply — Atlanta is likely to match any sane offer — but his restricted status may allow the Hawks to get a great deal on a key building block.

Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.

by KP Corleone on Jul 8, 2009 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions

I have an irrational love for Marvin’s game. I was originally against him as I don’t like 3s trying to play 4, but he is remarkably efficient playing at the 4, much like Travis.

If we traded Blake and Outlaw for Hinrich and Marvin, that is a successful offseason.

draft the stache

by Cablinasian on Jul 8, 2009 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions

I never looked at his 82games stats before…. ridiculously good net PER at PF.

draft the stache

by Cablinasian on Jul 8, 2009 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions

$10 million? Yikes....

Maybe 6 or 7 million.

by matthewcc on Jul 8, 2009 9:56 AM PDT reply actions

I likes it

I think it all comes down to who is willing to play for us for a reasonable salary. MW starting at 6 mil for 4 years sounds great. He is coming into his prime and has been in a so so situation, having to play with other players who play his position (childress and JJ). It is important to have tradable contracts so that if things do not work out, we can shuffle pieces and retool. He plays 3 and can backup the 4. Sign me up.

by goblazer1 on Jul 8, 2009 11:25 AM PDT reply actions

It'd be interesting.

And sounds good. Does M Williams still have NW connections? Does he like it here? Age wise, culture wise it looks like he could fit and be a good 3 / back up 4. It just seems that Atlanta would want to do something to keep him. I wonder if he’d even accept an offer sheet with Portland for less than what he makes now. Plus the Blazers would probably still want more ability to run the pick and roll.

by crosley57 on Jul 8, 2009 1:01 PM PDT reply actions

I like him for 7 million a year

provided we move outlaw

by Falcao on Jul 8, 2009 1:18 PM PDT reply actions

YEah worth a look.

B.S. Liberal Studies OSU '06
Trade for Gerald Wallace!!

by TyboOSU on Jul 8, 2009 1:56 PM PDT reply actions

Folks, it takes $ to get FA's, although I'm glad you like Marvin, but...

Charlie V = 5 years, 40 million = 6.8 million annnd Charlie is a comparable player (age, offensive skills), but considered by all accounts to be “lazy,” and a “terrible defender,” meaning…all things being equal…Marvin requires more $$$$$

Ben Gordon (The “Black Hole” on Steroids) = 5 years, 55 million

Bargnini (Toronto Center, averaged 15 pts last year, same as Marvin) = 5 years, 50 million…ALL THESE SHOW…Marvin aint com’n cheap!!

Marvin is “restricted,” the Hawks know Marvin is good, they will pay at least close to market value, so the only way to get Marvin, is to pay above market value and since this is our one shot at free agency, it is worth it!

*He might not be real tradeable if we overpay him, but we have a SF for the next decade who can play, and cheap assets in Batum, Rudy, & Bayless, that is enough…we can, and NEED, A RING THIS YEAR!!!

by irish3 on Jul 8, 2009 4:41 PM PDT reply actions

Right on

I agree with you – Marvin can’t be nabbed for $7 mil or thereabouts. He would probably require all of the Blazers cap room. Which they should offer him, because unlike anyone else on the market, he is a two-way player who can shoot from three and upgrade the starting lineup and defense. Marvin would be more valuable than Milsap.

Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.

by KP Corleone on Jul 9, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions