PDA

View Full Version : Jason Terry or Joe Johnson



NetsPaint
11-11-2011, 12:59 AM
Who deserves more money now?

Iggz53
11-11-2011, 01:01 AM
Joe Johnson...

Bravo95
11-11-2011, 01:20 AM
Terry is one of my favorite former Hawks, but as much as we dislike Joe Johnson, he has led a dysfunctional team with no depth to advance in the playoffs multiple times. Very few current "stars" have done that without having another legit star teammate.

bholly
11-11-2011, 01:34 AM
Terry is one of my favorite former Hawks, but as much as we dislike Joe Johnson, he has led a dysfunctional team with no depth to advance in the playoffs multiple times. Very few current "stars" have done that without having another legit star teammate.

He has Al Horford (an All-Star) and Josh Smith (borderline). let's not pretend he's playing with scrubs.

JJ deserves more then Terry, but not what he's getting.

OaklandsFinest
11-11-2011, 01:35 AM
Joe Johnson is soooo slept on. He is a very very good player, is he over paid? yes, but can score, defend, pass, and shoot, plus he's not 5'2...jk Jason Terry is a phenomenal bench scoring option, but Joe Johnson is a legit number 2 option an a championship team.

*Silver&Black*
11-11-2011, 01:47 AM
If Joe Johnson was on the Mavs in place of Terry for the Hawks, which team would be better? That will tell you.

Bravo95
11-11-2011, 01:51 AM
He has Al Horford (an All-Star) and Josh Smith (borderline). let's not pretend he's playing with scrubs.
Never said that, just looking at it objectively since I watch this team more often than most. Horford is probably my current favorite Hawk, but the reason he made those all star teams is because center is such a weak position. He'd still be shutout from the ASG if he were classified as a forward, which most believe he should be. Smith would have to be the 4th best player on a championship-level team. Both are good players, but I'm talking about legitimate stars.

JJ deserves more then Terry, but not what he's getting.
I think everyone knows that.

GhostfaceDrilla
11-11-2011, 03:08 AM
Terry is one of the most clutch players in the NBA and the best bench scorer. That said he is kinda one dimentional and inconsistent. Joe Johnson has been a star for 5-6 years now. A better question would be do you want Joe Johnson for 120 mil or Terry for about 10 mil per.

GhostfaceDrilla
11-11-2011, 03:10 AM
Terry is one of my favorite former Hawks, but as much as we dislike Joe Johnson, he has led a dysfunctional team with no depth to advance in the playoffs multiple times. Very few current "stars" have done that without having another legit star teammate.

Insert "Dirk Nowitzki" in 100 sized font.

ugafan
11-11-2011, 03:12 AM
Terry is one of the most clutch players in the NBA and the best bench scorer. That said he is kinda one dimentional and inconsistent. Joe Johnson has been a star for 5-6 years now. A better question would be do you want Joe Johnson for 120 mil or Terry for about 10 mil per.
That is worded so terribly. You're comparing one player's total deal amount to another's annual salary.

Insert "Dirk Nowitzki" in 100 sized font.

He said very few, not none.

thenetslegend
11-11-2011, 03:17 AM
Terry is one of the most clutch players in the NBA and the best bench scorer. That said he is kinda one dimentional and inconsistent. Joe Johnson has been a star for 5-6 years now. A better question would be do you want Joe Johnson for 120 mil or Terry for about 10 mil per.

joe johnson has never been a "star"

GhostfaceDrilla
11-11-2011, 03:19 AM
That is worded so terribly. You're comparing one player's total deal amount to another's annual salary.


He said very few, not none.

Terry makes about that much right now and he has 1 yr left.

Johnson 6 yr 120 mil or Terry 2 yr 20 mil

Better?

THE GIPPER
11-11-2011, 03:28 AM
^ the question wasnt "who has the better contract"

Joe Johnson > Jason Terry

John Walls Era
11-11-2011, 03:37 AM
Terry is one of the most clutch players in the NBA and the best bench scorer. That said he is kinda one dimentional and inconsistent. Joe Johnson has been a star for 5-6 years now. A better question would be do you want Joe Johnson for 120 mil or Terry for about 10 mil per.

Ok but thats not the question and that comment is pretty much valid if you replace Terry with any other player. JJ has a terrible contract and the Hawks really messed up if they can never advance far into the playoffs and end up rebuilding.

ShakeN'Bake
11-11-2011, 07:29 AM
Joe Johnson might be overpaid, but he still deserves more money than Terry.

blahblahyoutoo
11-11-2011, 08:54 AM
Terry makes about that much right now and he has 1 yr left.

Johnson 6 yr 120 mil or Terry 2 yr 20 mil

Better?

really depends on what i need on my team.
but regardless, if i'm in need of a center piece to build my team around, it wouldn't be JJ @ 20M per year.

Hitman21
11-11-2011, 09:57 AM
much rather overpay for JJ than sign Terry

Cosmic_Canon
11-11-2011, 10:37 AM
If Joe Johnson was on the Mavs in place of Terry for the Hawks, which team would be better? That will tell you.

Yep, Joe om the Mavs would be deadly.

Hawkeye15
11-11-2011, 11:05 AM
Joe Johnson is a much better player than Jason Terry.

There is your answer.

BranWingss
11-11-2011, 11:15 AM
Joe Johnson, though he certainly doesn't deserve a max contract in the NBA..

meloman1592
11-11-2011, 11:31 AM
Not even close. Joe Johnson is better by a long shot.

Chronz
11-11-2011, 12:13 PM
Never said that, just looking at it objectively since I watch this team more often than most.
No offense because Ive used this line myself but wouldnt the fact that you spend an inordinate amount of time focused on 1 team make you LESS objective? I know I always try to be objective but its not because I watch any 1 team more than someone else, its because I feel I watch more of EVERY team than everyone else.


Horford is probably my current favorite Hawk, but the reason he made those all star teams is because center is such a weak position. He'd still be shutout from the ASG if he were classified as a forward, which most believe he should be. Smith would have to be the 4th best player on a championship-level team. Both are good players, but I'm talking about legitimate stars.

Truly irrelevant, what your saying is he could still be the same player and still provide the same amount of support but just that he wouldnt be named an All-Star. This changes nothing of his productive worth or amount of support he provides JJ.

Which is why him being an All-Star and Josh Smith being borderline shouldnt be based on name recognition but production. Horford PERFORMS as an All-Star, and Josh Smith is arguably superior to JJ. Thats speaking on talent/production alone, not popularity.

The Hawks arent a playoff team because they have a star leading a few good players, they make the playoffs because they have a collection of 3 very good players but no true star.

smith&wesson
11-11-2011, 01:24 PM
I think if dirk had joe johnson on his team as long as jason terry has been there the mavs probably would have more then one ring.

sixer04fan
11-11-2011, 01:26 PM
Love Jason Terry, but he's not asked to do as much as Joe Johnson. They aren't in the same class.

Joe Johnson > Jason Terry

allSUAVE
11-11-2011, 01:45 PM
jason terry by a mile

Tony_Starks
11-11-2011, 02:43 PM
I never understood all the flack Joe Johnson gets on here. You would think that he is getting a direct deposit from posters personal bank accounts or something.

I don't care what he's getting paid, think about where the Hawks were at as a franchise before he got there......

Tony_Starks
11-11-2011, 02:45 PM
jason terry by a mile


I disagree but that Rhianna pick still demands my respect!!!

Hawkeye15
11-11-2011, 02:55 PM
I never understood all the flack Joe Johnson gets on here. You would think that he is getting a direct deposit from posters personal bank accounts or something.

I don't care what he's getting paid, think about where the Hawks were at as a franchise before he got there......

That is exactly why though. Its deals like his that are the root cause of this lockout. He is so grossly overpaid its ridiculous. Now, that being said, I am sure most people would love to be overpaid.

mkdo
11-11-2011, 03:47 PM
He has Al Horford (an All-Star) and Josh Smith (borderline). let's not pretend he's playing with scrubs.

JJ deserves more then Terry, but not what he's getting.

i don't consider horford a legit center, maybe if he'll play pf?

mttwlsn16
11-11-2011, 04:00 PM
as much as i like jason terry, of course JJ deserves more

KingPosey
11-11-2011, 04:04 PM
Insert "Dirk Nowitzki" in 100 sized font.

Insert where the guy said "very FEW".

Chronz
11-11-2011, 04:16 PM
I never understood all the flack Joe Johnson gets on here. You would think that he is getting a direct deposit from posters personal bank accounts or something.
If you count my criticism among the flak, I dislike the notion of him being a "star" in any sense of the word.


I don't care what he's getting paid, think about where the Hawks were at as a franchise before he got there......

At which point? They used to be pretty good, then they sucked, they sucked when they got him, then they eventually got good as he declined.


I think if dirk had joe johnson on his team as long as jason terry has been there the mavs probably would have more then one ring.
I disagree, JJ aint THAT good.

JordansBulls
11-11-2011, 04:34 PM
Joe Johnson

daleja424
11-11-2011, 05:00 PM
Joe Johnson. Terry is a streaky one dimensional player. He was amazing in the Finals... but Joe Johnson is still a FAR BETTER player.