Phoenix Move Up

[jredsaz]

How high can Knight & #13 get Phoenix if they would be willing to take on a bad contract?

#5 and Pekovic?
#6 and Asik?
#8 and Belinelli or Koufos and McLemore?
#9 and Ross and/or Joseph

[Texas Chuck]

New Orleans should be willing to Asik and 6 for Knight and 13. Same with the Kings with 8/Belinelli.

Others don't seem quite so clear cut. I'd say maybe for Minnesota and no for Toronto because Knight is a bad fit for them.

[blind prophet]

Sacramento is possible, but I think its hard to do on draft night. Trading picks after the draft would be rare, but before FA getting some time I think Sacramento would hold out.

[rsavaj]

is this draft even worth moving up for though? I'm not so sure any of the guys available at 6 are gonna turn out to be better than Knight already is. I think I'd rather just keep him and take my chances with 13

[blind prophet]

is this draft even worth moving up for though? I'm not so sure any of the guys available at 6 are gonna turn out to be better than Knight already is. I think I'd rather just keep him and take my chances with 13

I'd do the same if I was you, the only exception would be the scouting department loving a prospect and the idea of holding onto that cheap contract for years to come.

Depends on if there is something you like or believe in.

[jredsaz]

is this draft even worth moving up for though? I'm not so sure any of the guys available at 6 are gonna turn out to be better than Knight already is. I think I'd rather just keep him and take my chances with 13

I like Bender and Murray enough to make that trade. Dunn, Chriss and Brown are maybe. Heild is a no.

[jredsaz]

New Orleans should be willing to Asik and 6 for Knight and 13. Same with the Kings with 8/Belinelli.

Others don't seem quite so clear cut. I'd say maybe for Minnesota and no for Toronto because Knight is a bad fit for them.

Why would you consider Knight a bad fit for Toronto? He could be a better Lou Williams. Raps bench was 26th in the NBA in scoring. He can play on or off the ball with either Derozen or Lowery (or both in small ball lineups). He also creates a fail safe if Lowery becomes too expensive in 2017.

[Smitty731]

New Orleans should be willing to Asik and 6 for Knight and 13. Same with the Kings with 8/Belinelli.

Others don't seem quite so clear cut. I'd say maybe for Minnesota and no for Toronto because Knight is a bad fit for them.

Why would you consider Knight a bad fit for Toronto? He could be a better Lou Williams. Raps bench was 26th in the NBA in scoring. He can play on or off the ball with either Derozen or Lowery (or both in small ball lineups). He also creates a fail safe if Lowery becomes too expensive in 2017.

But is he playing over Cory Joseph? They aren't likely to play together because that would be a pretty small backcourt. And Lowry and DeRozan play such big minutes, that there aren't real minutes for 4 guards anyway. 3 guys and a handful of leftover minutes. And the Raptors love Joseph. They aren't benching him for Knight. That would be a TON of money tied up in the guards. Also, taking on the little extra money makes it that much harder to try and maintain Biyombo. Not the best use of their resources.

[Smitty731]

I don't think New Orleans would want to drop that far back. And Phoenix would then have two terrible contracts in their C position. And neither guy should be playing over Len.

Minnesota isn't going to want to drop that far back either, nor take on the money for Knight. He's not a bad fit, but the money doesn't work.

Sacramento could make some sense. But, again, not sure they want to drop back 5 picks. It seems like the group from about 3 or 4 to 10 is a tier. And then it drops off again.

And I covered why Toronto isn't doing it in the above post.

[jredsaz]

New Orleans should be willing to Asik and 6 for Knight and 13. Same with the Kings with 8/Belinelli.

Others don't seem quite so clear cut. I'd say maybe for Minnesota and no for Toronto because Knight is a bad fit for them.

Why would you consider Knight a bad fit for Toronto? He could be a better Lou Williams. Raps bench was 26th in the NBA in scoring. He can play on or off the ball with either Derozen or Lowery (or both in small ball lineups). He also creates a fail safe if Lowery becomes too expensive in 2017.

But is he playing over Cory Joseph? They aren't likely to play together because that would be a pretty small backcourt. And Lowry and DeRozan play such big minutes, that there aren't real minutes for 4 guards anyway. 3 guys and a handful of leftover minutes. And the Raptors love Joseph. They aren't benching him for Knight. That would be a TON of money tied up in the guards. Also, taking on the little extra money makes it that much harder to try and maintain Biyombo. Not the best use of their resources.

Knight is a far better player than Joseph. But I understand your thought process. I would argue however that Knight can fill Joseph's role plus add a scoring punch to a bench unit in desperate need of offense. I'm am not sure exactly how the team plans on resigning Biyombo considering the teams current cap situation.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/summer-agenda--toronto-raptors-152312946.html

Moving Joseph, Ross, and #9 for Knight and #13 opens up needed cap space, improves the bench, and allows the Raptors to add talent, possibly bring back Biyombo.

[jredsaz]

I don't think New Orleans would want to drop that far back. And Phoenix would then have two terrible contracts in their C position. And neither guy should be playing over Len.

Minnesota isn't going to want to drop that far back either, nor take on the money for Knight. He's not a bad fit, but the money doesn't work.

Sacramento could make some sense. But, again, not sure they want to drop back 5 picks. It seems like the group from about 3 or 4 to 10 is a tier. And then it drops off again.

And I covered why Toronto isn't doing it in the above post.

The trade works well for New Orleans. Replacing dead cap money in Asik for the production of Knight is a huge victory. Still can add quality talent at #13. Suns would not care about the Asik contract in this scenario. They go all in on the rebuild and hope that an amnesty provision is agreed upon during the next round of CBA negotiations.

Chander can be moved later in this offseason as teams with win now pressure miss on FAs but still have massive amounts of room to play with.

Knight contract is a good contract but I think Minnesota turns down that offer because Chriss, Dunn, or Bender make more sense with the age of their roster.

[Smitty731]

Why would you consider Knight a bad fit for Toronto? He could be a better Lou Williams. Raps bench was 26th in the NBA in scoring. He can play on or off the ball with either Derozen or Lowery (or both in small ball lineups). He also creates a fail safe if Lowery becomes too expensive in 2017.

But is he playing over Cory Joseph? They aren't likely to play together because that would be a pretty small backcourt. And Lowry and DeRozan play such big minutes, that there aren't real minutes for 4 guards anyway. 3 guys and a handful of leftover minutes. And the Raptors love Joseph. They aren't benching him for Knight. That would be a TON of money tied up in the guards. Also, taking on the little extra money makes it that much harder to try and maintain Biyombo. Not the best use of their resources.

Knight is a far better player than Joseph. But I understand your thought process. I would argue however that Knight can fill Joseph's role plus add a scoring punch to a bench unit in desperate need of offense. I'm am not sure exactly how the team plans on resigning Biyombo considering the teams current cap situation.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/summer-agenda--toronto-raptors-152312946.html

Moving Joseph, Ross, and #9 for Knight and #13 opens up needed cap space, improves the bench, and allows the Raptors to add talent, possibly bring back Biyombo.

I'd argue when you compare what a disaster Knight is on defense to Joseph being generally ok and the huge difference in salary, Joseph is just as good as Knight.

And the Raptors aren't likely to be able to keep Biyombo, but what I was saying is that they don't need to make it any more difficult.

[Smitty731]

I don't think New Orleans would want to drop that far back. And Phoenix would then have two terrible contracts in their C position. And neither guy should be playing over Len.

Minnesota isn't going to want to drop that far back either, nor take on the money for Knight. He's not a bad fit, but the money doesn't work.

Sacramento could make some sense. But, again, not sure they want to drop back 5 picks. It seems like the group from about 3 or 4 to 10 is a tier. And then it drops off again.

And I covered why Toronto isn't doing it in the above post.

The trade works well for New Orleans. Replacing dead cap money in Asik for the production of Knight is a huge victory. Still can add quality talent at #13. Suns would not care about the Asik contract in this scenario. They go all in on the rebuild and hope that an amnesty provision is agreed upon during the next round of CBA negotiations.

Chander can be moved later in this offseason as teams with win now pressure miss on FAs but still have massive amounts of room to play with.

Knight contract is a good contract but I think Minnesota turns down that offer because Chriss, Dunn, or Bender make more sense with the age of their roster.

Knight's contract isn't necessarily a bad contract, but it isn't good either. He's a backup level combo guard. You don't pay guys like that the money he is getting. At best his contract is neutral value. And that is even with the cap going up.

And you are making some major assumptions. I don't think Chandler is as easily moved as you think.

Also, Phoenix is already full on in the rebuild. And trading for a guy counting on the ability to use the amnesty isn't something I think a team that is already carrying a bad contract at the same position would do.

More than that, McDonough is done gambling for future payoff. He needs the team to start winning now. He's in his last year if this team doesn't start moving forward. He's not making moves that he hopes will be followed by other moves down the line. He can't afford that.

[jredsaz]

I don't think New Orleans would want to drop that far back. And Phoenix would then have two terrible contracts in their C position. And neither guy should be playing over Len.

Minnesota isn't going to want to drop that far back either, nor take on the money for Knight. He's not a bad fit, but the money doesn't work.

Sacramento could make some sense. But, again, not sure they want to drop back 5 picks. It seems like the group from about 3 or 4 to 10 is a tier. And then it drops off again.

And I covered why Toronto isn't doing it in the above post.

The trade works well for New Orleans. Replacing dead cap money in Asik for the production of Knight is a huge victory. Still can add quality talent at #13. Suns would not care about the Asik contract in this scenario. They go all in on the rebuild and hope that an amnesty provision is agreed upon during the next round of CBA negotiations.

Chander can be moved later in this offseason as teams with win now pressure miss on FAs but still have massive amounts of room to play with.

Knight contract is a good contract but I think Minnesota turns down that offer because Chriss, Dunn, or Bender make more sense with the age of their roster.

Knight's contract isn't necessarily a bad contract, but it isn't good either. He's a backup level combo guard. You don't pay guys like that the money he is getting. At best his contract is neutral value. And that is even with the cap going up.

And you are making some major assumptions. I don't think Chandler is as easily moved as you think.

Also, Phoenix is already full on in the rebuild. And trading for a guy counting on the ability to use the amnesty isn't something I think a team that is already carrying a bad contract at the same position would do.

More than that, McDonough is done gambling for future payoff. He needs the team to start winning now. He's in his last year if this team doesn't start moving forward. He's not making moves that he hopes will be followed by other moves down the line. He can't afford that.

My assumptions are derived from fact.

Knight's contract will be a good value post July 15 not only because lesser players will be paid more in free agency but because of the number of teams that are going to have excess cap space. That room increase will also lead to a market for Chandler.

It looks like you have a blind spot for the ramifications of the massive room increase. Or at least a lack of appreciation for it.

Each of the last two CBA negotiations bore an amnesty. Connect that with the room increase and savy general managers will see the value in taking on "bad contracts" for potential star acquisitions in the draft.

The Suns have not gone full rebuild. In point and fact they have tried to win in each of the last three seasons under McDonough. They would have finished near the back of the lottery had Bledsoe remained healthy.

From the media reports it looks like Sarver is going to give him room to assemble pieces around Booker and on Booker's time table. However, I will concede that Sarver could pull the rug out from under anyone in that organization at any time.

[Smitty731]

My assumptions are derived from fact.

Knight's contract will be a good value post July 15 not only because lesser players will be paid more in free agency but because of the number of teams that are going to have excess cap space. That room increase will also lead to a market for Chandler.

It looks like you have a blind spot for the ramifications of the massive room increase. Or at least a lack of appreciation for it.

Each of the last two CBA negotiations bore an amnesty. Connect that with the room increase and savy general managers will see the value in taking on "bad contracts" for potential star acquisitions in the draft.

The Suns have not gone full rebuild. In point and fact they have tried to win in each of the last three seasons under McDonough. They would have finished near the back of the lottery had Bledsoe remained healthy.

From the media reports it looks like Sarver is going to give him room to assemble pieces around Booker and on Booker's time table. However, I will concede that Sarver could pull the rug out from under anyone in that organization at any time.

1. Nothing has happened, so you have no facts. Everything is speculation right now.

2. If anyone has an understanding of what is happening because of the cap increase, I'm one of them. I've been talking about it for over a year.

Regardless of the increase, Knight's contract won't be good. It is still over $12 million and going up from there. That is fine for a starter. For a backup level combo guard? Not so good. And the same for Chandler.

If anyone has a blindspot, it is you. There is general agreement that Chandler is a bad contract. There is also general agreement that Knight is a neutral contract at best.

[bondom34]

If Knight's contract is a good one, Kanter's must be too, considering he's got similar to better production. Its not good.

[YourBuddy]

No interest for the Wolves.

1. Knight isn't a good fit with Rubio or LaVine.
2. Knight isn't a good contract. He actually makes their future cap more difficult.
3. The Wolves move so far back they could potentially miss out on guys like Chriss, Skal, and Davis.

[jredsaz]

If Knight's contract is a good one, Kanter's must be too, considering he's got similar to better production. Its not good.

After July15 Kanters contract will be fine. Although the deal is worth considerably more than Knights

[Smitty731]

If Knight's contract is a good one, Kanter's must be too, considering he's got similar to better production. Its not good.

After July15 Kanters contract will be fine. Although the deal is worth considerably more than Knights

Kanter is owed $53.6 million over the next three years. And that is only if he opts in to his final year. Knight is owed $56.5 million over the next 4 years, all fully guaranteed.

Not exactly sure how it is worth considerably more.

Beyond that, neither of them are fine or good. Both of them are neutral at best, or maybe "not as bad".

And Kanter gave 6MOY of the level production. His numbers, adjusted for playing time, were terrific. He's still a mess defensively, but he's an excellent scorer and rebounder. Knight doesn't give anything beyond backup level combo-guard production. He's not a bad player by any means, but he's not worth what he's paid. And his trade value is nil.

[jredsaz]

My assumptions are derived from fact.

Knight's contract will be a good value post July 15 not only because lesser players will be paid more in free agency but because of the number of teams that are going to have excess cap space. That room increase will also lead to a market for Chandler.

It looks like you have a blind spot for the ramifications of the massive room increase. Or at least a lack of appreciation for it.

Each of the last two CBA negotiations bore an amnesty. Connect that with the room increase and savy general managers will see the value in taking on "bad contracts" for potential star acquisitions in the draft.

The Suns have not gone full rebuild. In point and fact they have tried to win in each of the last three seasons under McDonough. They would have finished near the back of the lottery had Bledsoe remained healthy.

From the media reports it looks like Sarver is going to give him room to assemble pieces around Booker and on Booker's time table. However, I will concede that Sarver could pull the rug out from under anyone in that organization at any time.

1. Nothing has happened, so you have no facts. Everything is speculation right now.

2. If anyone has an understanding of what is happening because of the cap increase, I'm one of them. I've been talking about it for over a year.

Regardless of the increase, Knight's contract won't be good. It is still over $12 million and going up from there. That is fine for a starter. For a backup level combo guard? Not so good. And the same for Chandler.

If anyone has a blindspot, it is you. There is general agreement that Chandler is a bad contract. There is also general agreement that Knight is a neutral contract at best.

Actually it's a fact that the cap will rise significantly. There will reportedly be upwards of $1 billion dollars in maximum possible room available.

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/nbas-bestworst-case-2016-17-cap-projections/

Here is another fact, just because you have talked about something for a year doesn't mean you either understand or appreciate it. There is going to be more money than talent available. On top of that, another massive jump is coming in 2017. These facts dictate a different valuation process for longterm contracts consummated pre-2016.