I just checked the Hawks payroll at HoopsHype and it's listed at a little over $69 million for this year.  According to the best information I could find, the salary cap is set at $58 million.  Does this mean the Hawks are paying $11 million in luxury taxes?

I have a second question.  As far as the Hawks current players go, which of them could be released without penalty if any?  I think the roster is at 14 players, but I was wondering what if any options are available to the organization moving forward this year.

I remember reading in the paper that the Hawks were interested in signing another high profile player earlier this year after resigning Joe Johnson, even if it meant going into the luxury tax.  Anyway, they never did, so I would like to know where the whole free agent thing stands as far as this year's team goes.  I have a list of free agents I was looking at, and some of them seem to me like they would be good for the Hawks this year...

Thanks for any help...

The NBA...rules and guidelines...Where is it all going?

First, I must say that some of the responsibility for change in the NBA rests with the players.  It's the job of the players through the players union to, through foresight and wisdom and diligence, hold the NBA accountable to the idea that the league is all about the players.  There is no reason to consider that it is anything else to be fair, but absent creative leadership in the players union, the players can very quickly become prisoners of a system of doing things that does not take into account their best interests.  So, if the NBA is becoming inflexible, the primary burden for change rests with the NBA players and the players union.

Having established the role of the players in change, let's get to the main question at hand.  Is the NBA becoming inflexible and anti-player?

First, let;s take a look at two NBA rules that are outdated, already.  Currently the NBA requires that recently signed players signed in the off-season remain on the team they have signed with through December 15.  On the surface, this seems like a good rule.  Perhaps it even has served an important purpose through the years following its introduction.  However, it's not difficult to see how this rule could easily (and already has in my mind) become restrictive to the players.  All it takes is one instance of a player who could have been moved without the rule but who would like to be moved for the rule to be obsolete, and I believe we have already passed the point of this being the case.  The craziest thing is that the solution is so simple and so much better on every level.  In this case, there is no need even to remove the rule.  Instead, amend the rule to allow for trades involving players recently signed in the off-season to be traded with their personal approval.  As simple as that...add a player approval clause to the rule, and it is fixed.  The most remarkable thing about this type of change is that it can be instituted immediately.  No need to wait until next year.  And why not approve such an amendment?  It is necessary, and noone could possibly say that it is not better.  This change must and will happen at some point, but the NBA needs it now...

Second, let's take a look at the %125 rule currently in place to ensure balanced trades.  This is a more complicated issue, and there can be little doubt that there is need for some sort of rule along these lines.  However, I really believe this rule is finished in its current form.  My solution...allow for trades involving salaries outside of the %125 rule but require cash compensation in the amount necessary for the requirements of the rule to met in a trade that does not meet the requirements by the salaries.  This would ensure what the NBA is trying to guarantee in the first place, at least a semblance of a balance of power, while guaranteeing also the players' rights to move as they desire within the confines of sensibility...

These two problem situations have led me to believe that the NBA is becoming inflexible and anti-player.  I hope there is a solution very quickly, or we could be in for a big problem with the players.  If you are out there NBA, please read the handwriting on the wall...it's time for more flexible and player friendly rules...

I've wandered over from Peachtree (Hawks) to bid a hello to all you Warriors of the Bay City.  Great input on Jamal Crawford for all us Hawk hollerers...appreciate the input.

Thinking today about the Golden State of mind after having  acquired Speedy Claxton and Acie Law, and I found myself somehow in the Warrior Trade Bazaar wondering what you guys would think of a trade for Marcus Camby.  Here's my thing. (MORE ON CAMBY LATER)... I can't for my life understand why the Warriors, with their great offensive potential, have not considered even once, to my knowledge, pursuing Allen Iverson.  Yeah, you've got a great deal in Monta Ellis, who has that awesome contract, but at the price apparently being asked by Iverson, you guys would be in heaven with AI and ME as your guards.

Just two years ago AI was in a similar system in Denver, and he was, production wise, a top 5 NBA player...TOP 5.  How can anyone believe he wouldn't find his way back into the top 30 at least in the right situation.  If AI's Denver experience was anything for NBA fans, it seems to me it should have been a lesson on what works best for him.  Karl did a masterpiece job of incorporating AI into that offense, while not allowing anyone to become a one man show in it.  The result was awesome production for Iverson.

You guys are in the exact same situtation that the Nuggets were in two years ago.  Well, maybe slightly different in that they had defenders Camby and Nene, but Karl had them in a wide open offense which was capable of putting up big numbers.  So, I'm left wondering, why wouldn't Golden State pursue AI?  Well, maybe they don't like the idea of sacrificing what defense they have for a few years of Iverson.  Or maybe they just didn't really think about it all that much.  Whatever, but there are, in my mind, some very cool things that would come from the Warriors signing AI.

First, AI is a "Warrior" at heart. ..%110 every night from AI no matter what.  There's no questioning the professional character of Allen Iverson.  What you see is what you get, but Don Nelson is fully capable of doing exactly what George Karl was able to do in Denver with AI.  In fact, I think Nellie could take the whole thing one step further and bring his career full circle into a full team effort.  No matter what anybody says, I know one thing about myself, I'm not giving up on Brett Favre, and I'm not giving up on Allen iverson.  I want to be careful, however, to not underestimate Don Nelson, also.  He could do George Karl one step better with Iverson.  Second.  You guys are on national television 8 times this year.  Very cool.  Whatever was the story last year, people still want to see the Warriors.  To me that makes this a great opportunity to sign AI, go high profile, and get back in the spotlight.  Maybe you guys are worried about losing your young players in the spotlight, but, if you want to REALLY win, they've got to get used to it.  Having AI around would bring the spotlight to Golden State, and the Warriors could begin in earnest planning to get back to the top.  Third.  Going high profile will put the Warriors FOR REAL on the map with players.  Maybe in your young guys you have a core to build around.  However, it takes superstars to win championships, or at least superproducers.  For the money being discussed for AI, right now, nobody comes close to delivering what he could per dollar both on the court and with the superstars of basketball.  Fourth.  There's no reason to believe AI wouldn't consider the move, given the level of talent of the young players in the Bay area and given the presence of Monta Ellis and of Corey Maggette.  All superstar players are win now, and I think you guys can sell Iverson on a win now committment that includes him.   Fifth, signing AI could be the exact rallying cry the Warriors need to get back to the championship level.  "Win one for AI", could get you guys into a championship in, I believe, 5 years.  Everybody makes a big deal that Iverson has no ring, but I believe Golden State could easily be AIs prize down the road.  I'm not counting him out...

Finally, back to Camby.  Everybody knows Camby's gonna be traded.  If you guys sign AI, I say you're 50-50 to beat out all the championship contenders for Camby, assuming you guys pursue such a deal.  Camby is another one I'm not giving up on, and the combination of Iverson and Camby together again would be as sweet as it gets for you guys...

Just one take from the trade Bazaar (Bizaar).  Curious to hear Warriors input...

via i640.photobucket.com

Roger

OK...I have to post 75 words or my post won't count.  Are there even 75 things to say about Roger?  Tell the Hawks what you think about him by voting below...Post is still too "short", so let me add a thing or two about Roger.  He loves gold coins and he hates teenagers, and Roger is a sensitive mascot, so let's place those votes below now...