Aaron Brook's future

nevetsov · Post #1 » by **nevetsov** » Tue May 31, 2011 10:09 pm

With a league heavy in talented point guards and an uncertain CBA looming, what teams do you think would be offering Aaron Brooks a hefty contract, say one we would be unlikely to match? I think we'd probably match anything up to near full MLE, and from there threaten to match to acquire assets in s&t.

I have the day off so I'm going to break it down team by team:

ATL Hinrich and Teague
BOS Rondo on big money
CHA Augustin and Livingston <-potential but they may acquire one in the draft, their #1 need is a C
CHI Rose and Watson, big contracts already and SG the #1 priority
CLE Davis and likely Irving
DAL Kidd and Barea and Beaubois
DEN Lawson and Felton
DET Stuckey.. What a mess.. Maybe
GSW Already big money in their undersized guard rotation.. Can't see it happening
HOU Hah!
IND Collison and draft?
LAC Mo Will and Bledsoe
LAL too poor, MLE will be their ceiling and they already have Fish, Blake
MEM Conley and Vasquez
MIA Potentially the could offer the full MLE.. but then they'd only have min contracts and scraps to fill the rest of their roster so not likely.
MIL Jennings and someone.. Who is their backup point?
MIN Flynn, Rubio
NJN Deron
NOH CP3
NYK Billups and Douglas
OKC Westbrook and Maynor
ORL Nelson and Arenas
PHI Lou Will and Holiday
PHX
POR Miller.. Maybe via trade but again they need bigs first and foremost
SAC Beno and Reke.. Maybe?
SAS Parker and Hill
TOR Calderon and Bayless
UTA Harris and a couple of decent backups
WAS Some guy called John Wall

So the only teams I consider to be serious threats are CHA, DET, POR and SAC with potentially MIA as well.

Then factor in the PG prospects available for cheap in this years draft. Walker, Knight, Jimmer etc..

This is the year to not be a free agent, and if you are, you'd want to be a big, or a wing. Certainly not a PG.

I think there is a chance we will tender the Qualifying offer of one year, 2.9 mill and he will accept. Next year will be more of a buyers market with more clarity as to the CBA limits and more teams having money to spend. Plus, guys like Nash/ Kidd/ Billups all expire which frees up more demand. Plus, Brooks will have more time to acclimate, play more mins and raise his value.

PS I want Felton as a sun next season. Good shooter/ defender, plus blew up in NY's system.

thamadkant · Post #2 » by **thamadkant** » Tue May 31, 2011 10:43 pm

I think Suns will offer him a the Qualifying... or if they have a Nash trade setup...
They'll offer him a 4 year 20 Million with incentives.... He'll accept that if no one else make an offer..
Thats a great contract, considering he can score 20ppg and 5apg... a cheap Mo Williams type, and very very easy to move.

BurningHeart · Post #3 » by **BurningHeart** » Tue May 31, 2011 11:17 pm

Hopefully to Sacramento.

nevetsov · Post #4 » by **nevetsov** » Tue May 31, 2011 11:28 pm

So you get to see him 41 games a season, hey BH? Mancrush much?

JohnVancouver · Post #5 » by **JohnVancouver** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 12:33 am

I'm not sold on Brooks by any measure - I like that he stood up for ZD when the ref insulted him but I worry about his head, and he's not really the scorer we thought he was. He has his moments but he's undersized, terrible defender and gets worked for a lot of points, and likely to take T's/be tossed at the worst time. Let's deal him, please

Revived · Post #6 » by **Revived** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 12:34 am

Why not sign and trade AB to Denver for Felton. Then sign Felton to an extension.

Denver is likely to not get anything better for Felton anyway since he's expiring after this season. Plus I doubt they wanna keep an unhappy player within their young team.

thamadkant · Post #7 » by **thamadkant** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 1:14 am

so you guys want Felton who dissed Nash....

remember him saying, any point guard can put up good numbers next to Stoudemire or something in that context?

I might be trippin, but I recall it was a subtle jab at Nash's and a big credit to Stoudemire.

And you want him to back up Nash.... talk about being unhappy.

BurningHeart · Post #8 » by **BurningHeart** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 2:14 am

nevetsov wrote:So you get to see him 41 games a season, hey BH? Mancrush much?

Only if Sacramento moved to Anaheim, lmao.

JohnVancouver · Post #9 » by **JohnVancouver** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 2:53 am

sunsfan88 wrote:Why not sign and trade AB to Denver for Felton. Then sign Felton to an extension.

Denver is likely to not get anything better for Felton anyway since he's expiring after this season. Plus I doubt they wanna keep an unhappy player within their young team.

I'd really rather have Sessions. He won't have anyone like Stat to work with here and, like he said, anyone looks good passing to Amar'e, ergo ......

Post #10 » by **lilfishi22** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 3:54 am

I'm down for Sessions.

Post #11 » by **Qwigglez** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 5:33 am

Suns should give Brooks the QO, and entertain Nash trades (most likely to Dallas). Nash can't really get us any valuable assets for building long-term, but we can use him to add other long-term contracts to a deal (Childress and Warrick) for expiring contracts.

BurningHeart · Post #12 » by **BurningHeart** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 6:26 am

Why would Dallas want Nash? Serious question.

Nando88 · Post #13 » by **Nando88** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 6:32 am

for real... what does dallas do with jKidd?

NashtyNas · Post #14 » by **NashtyNas** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 9:10 am

I'm all for resigning Brooks if it means he's coming cheap; like you pointed out, I don't see many teams looking for a point guard, certainly not someone in the mold of Brooks.

The teams you listed (Portland, Charlotte, Detroit, Sacramento) are about the only teams that really would be interested, and the only one I can see offering him a contract would be Portland (and they have no cap space, so the MLE would have to stick through the CBA negotiations).

With that said, I want the FO to play the waiting game on this guy; let the market decide his value. If someone offers him a big contract (I'm going to say that it's just about impossible this happens) then you let him walk. Otherwise, offer him 20/4 like you suggested, have him be the gunner off the bench in a Barbosa mold. I'm not interested in having this guy be our starter at the guard because he's not a distributor, nor can he defend (my grandma could probably drop 30 on him).

If he's going to cost any more than $6mil/season, I say let him go to the team that's willing to pay it; and we need to let him know that his future with the team is absolutely not as a starter unless we trade Nash and let him start there till we can find a real starter. I don't want no drama queens on this team.

Fo-Real · Post #15 » by **Fo-Real** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 2:25 pm

Nando88 wrote:for real... what does dallas do with jKidd?

HUH??????? Oh, I thought you called me!! :lol:

I was about to say, "Hell, I dont know." :lol:

Frank Lee · Post #16 » by **Frank Lee** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 4:01 pm

I think we should sign him ASAP to a reasonable deal... Brooks has value to us leading the second unit. If he falters, then he can be dealt mid season. We gave up assets to get him. Letting him go for nothing is not a wise option. It eggfaces the front office even more and we'd have to find another PG if he were to leave. Right now, we should keep Dowdell around real cheap. He has earned it, even if he is the 15th man.

Sign Brooks, play ball.

Now if we draft a PG at #13... then something is up I reckon. I guess, if he were to be traded, it would be on or with in the week of the draft. Keep in mind, if we use the MLE to sign Brooks, we cannot sign and trade him... I think thats how it reads. But to be honest, I'd rather take a hit of micro-dot and try to put together a gas grill w/o instructions than to figure the cba rules out.

A sign-and-trade deal can be made even with players who have been renounced, but cannot be made when the player is signed using the Mid-Level, Bi-Annual or Disabled Player exceptions. .....
One complication with sign-and-trade deals is that the signed player can immediately become a BYC player (see question number 76 for more information on BYC), so the player's BYC value must be used when determining whether the trade is allowed.

JohnVancouver · Post #17 » by **JohnVancouver** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 4:25 pm

"I'd rather take a hit of micro-dot and try to put together a gas grill w/o instructions than to figure the cba rules out. "

You're on a roll, brother

Yes, much as I don't really like Brooks here I can see him on the second unit, so long as his ego can take it. And building value is not a bad thing - there'll be a trade deadline next year, too. Just so long as we don't have to overpay to keep him, or lose him for nothing which means we straight dumped Gogi and the ORL pick .....

If so, that will be this FO's version of the KT deal

YFZblu · Post #18 » by **YFZblu** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 7:30 pm

Nando88 wrote:for real... what does dallas do with jKidd?

Jason Kidd's role on the team has more to do with his limitations than anything. Nash is capable of so much more than Jason Kidd is right now.

Nando88 · Post #19 » by **Nando88** » Wed Jun 1, 2011 8:00 pm

freak it lets swap PG's and have a kidd-phx reunion and nash-mavs reunion! lol.... nah

7Insomniac · Post #20 » by **7Insomniac** » Thu Jun 2, 2011 10:16 am

JohnVancouver wrote:"I'd rather take a hit of micro-dot and try to put together a gas grill w/o instructions than to figure the cba rules out. "

You're on a roll, brother

Yes, much as I don't really like Brooks here I can see him on the second unit, so long as his ego can take it. And building value is not a bad thing - there'll be a trade deadline next year, too. Just so long as we don't have to overpay to keep him, or lose him for nothing which means we straight dumped Gogi and the ORL pick .....

If so, that will be this FO's version of the KT deal

I agree. The goal is to win a championship. Unless we have the talent to dominate the opponent, then Brooks should never be a starting PG on a championship team. I'm fine with him running the second unit.