After a Josh Smith jumper, Atlanta led by nine with 4:09 to play, and the Bucks’ chances were looking pretty grim. But Milwaukee went on a 14-0 run over the next three and a half minutes to take a five-point lead. The run was keyed by John Salmons (8 points) and Ersan Ilyasova, who made a couple of key saves that led to a Carlos Delfino three and an inside bucket for Ilyasova.

Also key was Joe Johnson’s sixth foul, which came on a drive to the basket with 2:15 to play. Kurt Thomas, who drew a couple of key fouls in Game 4, stepped in and took the charge, and the play forced the Hawks’ best player out of the game. They tried to go to Josh Smith and Jamal Crawford down the stretch, but they went a combined 0-for-5 in the final two minutes. Throw in the Bucks’ 10-for-12 stretch from the free throw line (including 4-for-4 from Brandon Jennings with under 0:20 to play), and it all adds up to a Milwaukee win.

Jennings led the Bucks with 25-4-3 and is now averaging 20-3-4 in the postseason. Salmons chipped in with 19 points and played excellent defense on Johnson (6-for-16, 13 points) all night. The Bucks have won three straight after Scott Skiles decided to put Salmons on Johnson and let his defensive specialist, Luc Mbah a Moute, cover Josh Smith, who killed Milwaukee in the first two games. Salmons has proven that he’s up to the challenge and it has completely turned this series on its head.

The Bucks now head back to the friendly confines of the Bradley Center on Friday night with a chance to close out the series. I fully expect a raucous Milwaukee crowd.

Photo from fOTOGLIF

What is a “thin line,” you ask? Well, I’m not 100% sure I coined it, but it’s my term for a player who scores, but brings almost nothing else — rebounds, assists, steals or blocks — to the table.

In order to determine who has the thinnest line in the NBA, I divided the player’s points by the sum of their rebounds, assists, steals and blocks to come up with the Thin Line Ratio (TLR). The bigger the number, the thinner the line.

To be eligible, a player has to average at least 20 minutes per game. And to be fair to the biggest scorers in the league, if their rebounds, assists, steals and blocks add up to 10+ per game, then they’re not eligible. So players like Carmelo Anthony, Kevin Durant, Danny Granger and Kobe Bryant are in the clear. I figure any player who is posting 10+ in those four categories is bringing plenty to the table.

So here’s a look at the 10 thinnest lines in the NBA:

1. Kevin Martin (TLR: 2.89)
2. Jamal Crawford (2.79)
3. Marcus Thornton (2.69)
4. Ben Gordon (2.51)
5. Eric Gordon (2.43)
6. Ray Allen (2.43)
7. Jason Terry (2.36)
8. Richard Hamilton (2.33)
9. Corey Maggette (2.31)
10. J.J. Redick (2.28)

Surprise, surprise…that’s a list of nine or ten shooting guards, depending on how you classify Corey Maggette (and maybe Jamal Crawford). These are players whose job it is to shoot the ball and they obviously embrace that role. You won’t see these players battling for rebounds or doing a lot of penetrate and dish.

The top point guard in TLR? Aaron Brooks (2.19), winner of this year’s Most Improved Player award.

The top small forward (other than Maggette)? Josh Howard (2.12)

The top power forward? Bill Walker (2.14), but he played in just 35 games. Al Harrington (2.12) was the next highest PF on the list.

The top center? Andrea Bargnani (1.91), but is he really a center? The next highest eligible center is Channing Frye (1.33).

Who has the thickest line (i.e. the lowest TLR)?

PG – Jason Kidd (0.61)
SG – Thabo Sefolosha (0.72)
SF – Luc Mbah a Moute (0.78)
PF – Jared Jeffries (0.71)
C – Marcus Camby (0.43)

Jason Kidd plus four defensive specialists. Boy, that would be some ugly offense, but they’d be a bitch to score on.

Photo from fOTOGLIF

Another interesting thing to note about the Hawks is that Jamal Crawford is getting a ton of minutes at point guard at Mike Bibby’s expense. In six January games, Bibby is averaging just 25 minutes per game to Crawford’s 29. More importantly, in crunch time against the Celtics, the Hawks went with Crawford, not Bibby. At this point in Bibby’s career, Crawford is simply better able to get his own shot. He’s not a much of a distributor, though he’s capable of hitting the open guy when he doesn’t have a shot (which doesn’t happen very often).

Marc Stein’s sources say that he is.

NBA front-office sources say that the Warriors and Hawks will soon complete a deal sending Crawford to Atlanta for Acie Law and Speedy Claxton.

Warriors coach Don Nelson made no secret of the fact that Crawford wasn’t in his future plans. By shedding Crawford’s longer contract and by virtue of insurance payments that will cover some of the costs of Claxton, Golden State would secure a decent measure of payroll relief with the trade.

Crawford is definitely a shoot-first point guard, as evidenced by this study I did a few weeks ago, though I think he’s better suited to playing off the ball. His shot selection is suspect (career 40.4% from the field), but he is a prolific scorer. In fact, he has averaged at least 17 points in each of the last four seasons, but he regularly takes 15-17 shots per game. Is it possible to get him to rein in his attempts and be a little more selective in his attempts? I’d rather he average 14-15 points on 10-11 shots.

How does this affect Mike Bibby’s contract negotiations? Acie Law wasn’t working out, but now that Crawford is on the roster, the Hawks have a backup plan in case Bibby’s expectations are too high. Bibby takes better care of the ball, but he’s a shoot-first point guard as well, so a reined-in Crawford wouldn’t be that much different.

Crawford’s contract runs another two years at the tune of $19 million, so while the fiscal impact for the Hawks in the short term is minor, they are giving up about $10 million in projected cap space in 2010 by making this trade.

After the season, Jamal Crawford can opt out of the final two years of his contract. Those two years would pay him $19.5 million, so given the current state of the economy and the coming “nuclear winter” for NBA free agents, it’s highly unlikely that he’d be able to find that kind of money in the open market. But Tim Kawakami says that Golden State head coach Don Nelson is pushing the guard to opt out.

I’ve heard that when Nelson explained Crawford’s recent one-game benching, he spoke about getting the younger players more time, etc, etc.

But Nelson also told Crawford that he was doing the complete benching in order to help Crawford’s per-game averages, all the better for when (or if) Crawford opts-out, which Nelson very much wants him to do this summer.

That is a loud and clear NBA message, by the way. By even mentioning the opt-out (Crawford can erase the final two years and $19M+ on his deal), Nelson was indicating to Crawford that Nelson wanted him to opt-out.

Even more, Nelson was suggesting that Crawford HAD BETTER OPT-OUT or else Nelson would probably make sure that the situation next year isn’t to Crawford’s liking.

My understanding is that Crawford’s reaction was the same as any proud player’s reaction: Why in the world should I be pushed into a decision like that?

Nelson is trying to shove Crawford into opting out, and therefore messing up Crawford’s marketability, which, in the end, probably will drive Crawford NOT to opt out this summer.

I repeat: What in the world is Nelson doing? If you guess that he’s trying to make things as messy as possible, either to shake up the Warriors or to make his firing (with TWO YEARS and $12M left on the deal after this season) as inevitable and quick as possible…

Exactly. Given Nelson’s actions, it only makes it more likely that Crawford would stand his ground and choose to play out the final two years of his contract. The only way I can see an opt out in this scenario is if the situation in Golden State is so bad that Crawford decides it’s not worth the money to stay. Nelson would be better off trying to work with Crawford, but it seems like the two are past that point. The guy is averaging 19.6 points and 4.4 assists per game — it’s not like his contract is dead money. Sure, he has never been known as a good defender and he’s not an efficient scorer (41% FG%), but that shouldn’t be a surprise to the Warriors. Crawford has been in the league for eight years — what did they expect? (And since when did Nelson put a lot of stock in defense?)

One of the things I’d like to see in the next Collective Bargaining Agreement is non-guaranteed contracts. Teams should be able to cut a player if they are underperforming, injured or if the relationship has just run its course. As a consequence, the team would have to pay 50% of the player’s salary for the remainder of the contract. If the player is picked up on waivers, his new team would pay the other 50%, essentially getting him at half price. If he clears waivers, he becomes a free agent and would be able to sign with whomever he likes. This system would reduce the number of dead contracts around the league (which would make management happy) and allow for more player movement in bad situations like Crawford’s (which would make the players happy) while still allowing for some security if a player is injured or his game disappears. This, combined with shorter contracts — three years when a player signs with a new team, four years when he re-signs with his current team — would make it a lot tougher for bad general managers to get their teams into salary cap hell. (I’m looking at you, Ernie Grunfeld.)

With the trade deadline in the rear view mirror and players tied to their current teams at least until the summer, it’s a good time to take a look ahead at the free agent class of 2009. Given the state of the economy and how so many teams are saving up for the class of 2010, some are suggesting that this summer’s free agency could be a “nuclear winter” of sorts, no pun intended. The salary cap and luxury tax thresholds are likely to decline for the first time in years and that has GMs and owners around the league scrambling to cut salary where they can.

There are three types of free agents: players with early termination options (ETO) or player options (PO), restricted free agents and unrestricted free agents.

Players with ETOs or POs

This group includes Kobe Bryant, Jermaine O’Neal, Al Harrington, Jamal Crawford and Mehmet Okur, but it’s highly unlikely that any of these guys will hit the open market given the kind of money they’ll be making by extending their respective contracts. Of this group, Hedo Turkoglu, Anderson Varejao and maybe Carlos Boozer are the only big names that are likely to hit free agency. Boozer has already stated that he’s going to opt out, but he may decide against it if he doesn’t come back strong from his injuries. Turkoglu — the reigning Most Improved Player — is having another nice season, but he’s not playing quite as well as last year. Still, he can command more than the $7.3 million he’s due to make next season. Varejao could stay with the Cavs and make $6.2 million next season, but he and his agent (Dan Fegan) have been looking for more. Varejao wants a long term deal but it seems he and the Cavs disagree on how much he’s actually worth.

For the most part, guys in this group are going to be conservative and play out their contracts.

Restricted Free Agents

RFAs hardly ever change uniforms, but in this economic climate there are teams that are unlikely to match substantial offers for their restricted free agents. The other issue is that once a team signs a RFA to an offer sheet, the player’s team has a full week to match the offer. Most teams know instantly whether or not they’re going to match, but they take the full week so that the other team can’t make any other offers because its money is tied up in the offer sheet. The NBA should reduce this period to three or four days so that teams are more willing to make offers to RFAs. Or better yet, it should eliminate restricted free agency completely to avoid Josh Childress-type cases in the future.

(Stepping down from my soapbox…)

Anyway, the list of restricted free agents includes Childress, David Lee, Paul Millsap, Nate Robinson, Charlie Villanueva, Ramon Sessions (ESPN says he’s restricted though HoopsHype and ShamSports show Sessions as an UFA), Marvin Williams, Raymond Felton, Leon Powe and Linas Kleiza.

The Knicks can’t afford to keep both Lee and Robinson and sign LeBron or some other max-type free agent next summer, so if someone comes along and offers either player a substantial contract, it is unlikely that the Knicks will be able to match. Millsap played great in Boozer’s absence, and they are very similar players so it is unlikely that Utah can afford to keep both. Millsap looks like a potential All-Star and would be a cheaper option, but only time will tell if the Jazz have the balls to let Boozer walk.

Childress will probably return to the U.S. after a year playing in Greece. I suspect he’ll be a mid-level type guy, which increases the number of potential suitors as teams that are over the cap can still sign a player at the mid-level. The Bucks are in financial trouble and they need to get rid of Michael Redd or Richard Jefferson if they hope to keep both Sessions and Villanueva. Both players are having career years under Scott Skiles, but it’s unclear if the Bucks will be able to keep them. I’d expect Sessions to be a mid-level guy (and should be a solid starter for that price), while Charlie V might command a bit more. There are still questions about his heart, but if he’s thriving under Skiles, could he really be lacking toughness and drive? The Bucks have been hit by injuries to Redd and Andrew Bogut but are still holding onto the #8 playoff spot in the East, so they’d be wise to keep this core together if they can.

The Bobcats’ decision to draft D.J. Augustin made Raymond Felton expendable, so he could probably be had for the right price. I’m guessing that he’s a mid-level guy as well, though he and his agent will probably want more. Leon Powe and Linas Kleiza are both productive bench players and if the offer sheet is big enough, the Celtics and Nuggets (respectively) may decide not to match.

Unrestricted Free Agents

This group includes Ben Gordon, Lamar Odom, Shawn Marion, Allen Iverson, Ron Artest, Mike Bibby, Andre Miller, Jason Kidd, Rasheed Wallace, Trevor Ariza and Brandon Bass. Most of these players are older and on the decline, but they can still play. Veteran players in this group might be shocked by the kind of pay cut that they’re going to have to take in today’s climate. The days of 30+ year-old stars (not superstars) signing max or near-max deals are over, at least for a while. I bet all of these guys sign for less than $10 million per season. (I know…that’s peanuts, right?)

Gordon, Ariza and Bass are younger and could still be on the rise if they find the right team. Gordon seems to think he’s a starter and should be paid as such, but he’s small and doesn’t have a reputation for being a very good defender. He can really score though. If some team wants to pay him starter’s money, he’d be a good match to play alongside a bigger point guard who could cover the opponent’s off guard (Utah, Denver, Detroit?) or he needs to go to a team that doesn’t emphasize the defensive end.

Ariza continues to play well for the Lakers, but since he’s a much cheaper option than Odom, he’s probably going to be staying put. Bass had a terrific season two years ago, and is really coming on after a slow start this season. He’s just 23 and has some upside. I’d expect some team will sign him to a deal averaging in the $3-$4 million range, which would make him one of the best bargains of the summer.

So where will these players end up? Your guess is as good as mine. There are only a handful of teams — Atlanta, Detroit, Memphis (of course), Minnesota, Oklahoma City, Portland, Sacramento and Toronto — with the cap space (~$7 million or more) to sign a good player for another team, so I think there may be quite a few starter-level players/borderline stars signing mid-level deals this season. Playoff contenders that are over the cap won’t be able to pass up a good player for $5 million per season and there should be a number of guys that fit the bill this summer.