The 2016 Offseason Thread

[Walt_Uoob]

After reading some really good points made in this thread I un-voted for trading Goodwin as a likely outcome before the season. But then I remembered we extended Jenkins's deadline, which made me change my mind back. It seems to me that one of three things is up:

a) We still believe in Goodwin and are looking for a Knight trade to relieve pressure in the guard rotation, after which we'd sign Jenkins to be the last guard in the rotation
b) We think Goodwin is no better than Jenkins and/or is a potential distraction, so we're trying to move him on his own or include him in a bigger deal
c) I'm reading way too much into the Jenkins thing and we're just waiting to get a better sense of the strength of our PF rotation and/or waiting to see if a player we like more comes along before inking Jenkins.

Ha so probably C. Maybe I'll switch back.

[jcsunsfan]

I hear ya, but if you are going to have a one way player, it can't be your wing. He would make the whole team worse offensively, not just himself. A PF or C who plays closer to the basket, yea, Rodman, Ben Wallace, TT, or a Bismack, but not your 3, it would kill spacing. The drive and kick and pick and roll game would be dead, because you would not have a shooter who needs to be respected on the wing.

No thank you.


Tell Warren to tighten up his D. I heard he gained size and height.

I'm just saying he holds FAR more value than Goodwin. I think we could use some defense in situations, and I'd only want him ever on the floor with all shooters, like if you had Knight, Booker and Warren out there right now, it might be good to have Harkless at the 4 in such a scenario.

But like I've said in previous posts, after signing Dudley I don't think it's worth it. He is such a good versatile defender, that my hopes if we signed him (before we signed Dudley) was that his offense would come around. I likely wouldn't play him much though, particularly not to the expense of our own young guys, but if someone like Thompson or Paul were having an unstoppable game, he's a useful tool to have in your arsenal.

That statement makes sense to most fans, but recent events clearly show that today's NBA values players differently than in the past.

1. "Potential" is at an all-time high premium. (Crabbe)
2. Guards, especially 2's, are valued much more highly than in the past. (Crabbe)
3. SF's and traditional PF's don't seem to carry nearly the value.
4. C's are still really valuable, especially defensive centers that can hit the occasional 15 footer (at least in Laker land).

Not saying your statement is obviously wrong, just not as clear cut. GM's know what other players can do, even seldom used ones. Many fans derive their valuations from stats or from media-types who spout the same party-line without evaluating for themselves. Archie, has incredible speed and physical attributes. He might have a little more value than we think.

[NavLDO]

I hear ya, but if you are going to have a one way player, it can't be your wing. He would make the whole team worse offensively, not just himself. A PF or C who plays closer to the basket, yea, Rodman, Ben Wallace, TT, or a Bismack, but not your 3, it would kill spacing. The drive and kick and pick and roll game would be dead, because you would not have a shooter who needs to be respected on the wing.

No thank you.


Tell Warren to tighten up his D. I heard he gained size and height.

I'm just saying he holds FAR more value than Goodwin. I think we could use some defense in situations, and I'd only want him ever on the floor with all shooters, like if you had Knight, Booker and Warren out there right now, it might be good to have Harkless at the 4 in such a scenario.

But like I've said in previous posts, after signing Dudley I don't think it's worth it. He is such a good versatile defender, that my hopes if we signed him (before we signed Dudley) was that his offense would come around. I likely wouldn't play him much though, particularly not to the expense of our own young guys, but if someone like Thompson or Paul were having an unstoppable game, he's a useful tool to have in your arsenal.

He does to us...but does he really hold that much value to the Blazers?

SG 1 C.J. McCollum
2 Allen Crabbe
3 Pat Connaughton
SF 1 Evan Turner
2 Jake Layman
3 Luis Montero
PF 1 Al-Farouq Aminu
2 Meyers Leonard
3 Moe Harkless
4 Noah Vonleh

The Blazers are so deep from 2-4...Layman's shown well, Turner, Aminu, Leonard (when healthy), Vonleh...would they really miss 18mpg from Harkless, or would they like a little more depth at the PG...how about Knight/Goodwin for Harkless with a new contract that matches?? Some may say that's an overpay on our part, but c'mon, we have no D at the 4; our best D is 6'7" Duds or 6'5" Tucker??? At the 4?? Harkless would be awesome for us, IMO, and with Bled/Booker/Warren/Harkless/Len, we are covered offensively, and we have a guy who can defend down low or at mid-range while Len, if sent back to his normal C duties, is more than capable rim defender. Yeah, I'd give up Knight for that...easy!

[bwgood77]

Not at all, that's why I said we'd have to throw in extra compensation. Trust me, I know Harkless is worth more than Goodwin, and likely Goodwin wouldn't even be the centerpiece...just a part to make the salaries work, etc., but if we engage Portland, with a pkg that included Goodwin, I think we'd have a better chance than just trying to 'out-contract' Portland, as I originally postulated.

What I'm saying is Kerrsed has the right idea; it's just about us having the right pieces to make it work. Hi idea was better than mine, which was to try to make the contract 'unsignable' by Portland. You brought up some good points about the Blazer's ownership, etc., so I think Harkless is worth more than what his offensive production has shown, but why can't Goodwin, since he has little value to us, but being 21, may hold better value for a different team that might feel a change in scenery/coaching may work, plus whatever else...Tucker?? IDK. But Goodwin holds some value...just not much with us, anymore.

We could hold onto him, sure, but is we try to get Harkless, Goodwin might be a good piece to throw in is all I'm saying.

Salaries matching are kind of inconsequential when everyone has massive cap space. You can just absorb salaries and they don't have to match. Only if both teams are exceeding or going to exceed the cap with the deal do they have to match.

Sure, I guess they may hold Goodwin in high regard for whatever reason, despite having Lillard, McCollum and Crabbe, plus Evan Turner who has mostly played SG. Goodwin likely wouldn't see the light of day and then would be ANOTHER RFA along with Crabbe next year.

I think a team like Brooklyn who is thin at guard after having Crabbe and Johnson matched, or even Philly could maybe like him, though I doubt he is even on most team's radar. If we think his #s suck, I can't see many or any GMs even giving him any consideration whatsoever.

[NavLDO]

I hear ya, but if you are going to have a one way player, it can't be your wing. He would make the whole team worse offensively, not just himself. A PF or C who plays closer to the basket, yea, Rodman, Ben Wallace, TT, or a Bismack, but not your 3, it would kill spacing. The drive and kick and pick and roll game would be dead, because you would not have a shooter who needs to be respected on the wing.

No thank you.


Tell Warren to tighten up his D. I heard he gained size and height.

I'm just saying he holds FAR more value than Goodwin. I think we could use some defense in situations, and I'd only want him ever on the floor with all shooters, like if you had Knight, Booker and Warren out there right now, it might be good to have Harkless at the 4 in such a scenario.

But like I've said in previous posts, after signing Dudley I don't think it's worth it. He is such a good versatile defender, that my hopes if we signed him (before we signed Dudley) was that his offense would come around. I likely wouldn't play him much though, particularly not to the expense of our own young guys, but if someone like Thompson or Paul were having an unstoppable game, he's a useful tool to have in your arsenal.

That statement makes sense to most fans, but recent events clearly show that today's NBA values players differently than in the past.

1. "Potential" is at an all-time high premium. (Crabbe)
2. Guards, especially 2's, are valued much more highly than in the past. (Crabbe)
3. SF's and traditional PF's don't seem to carry nearly the value.
4. C's are still really valuable, especially defensive centers that can hit the occasional 15 footer (at least in Laker land).

Not saying your statement is obviously wrong, just not as clear cut. GM's know what other players can do, even seldom used ones. Many fans derive their valuations from stats or from media-types who spout the same party-line without evaluating for themselves. Archie, has incredible speed and physical attributes. He might have a little more value than we think.

I agree more with BW on this. Guards that shoot .232 from 3 and .417 from 2, and .674 from the FT line, in heir 3rd year in the league, likely doesn't hold much value, especially when all that athleticism doesn't add up to good D...what else is it good for?? To slash his way inside, only to be fouled or miss his shot, and if fouled, only makes 2/3 FTs??

His athleticism/motor needs to be 'channeled' into something productive, and so far, in 3 seasons, it has yet o be 'channeled' properly.

And what you didn't list in their is versatile 3/4s with 7' Wingspans and good D--those guys are valuable in this league, especially young ones that can be surrounded by offensive players, that HAVE shown value, like Harkless.

[NavLDO]

Not at all, that's why I said we'd have to throw in extra compensation. Trust me, I know Harkless is worth more than Goodwin, and likely Goodwin wouldn't even be the centerpiece...just a part to make the salaries work, etc., but if we engage Portland, with a pkg that included Goodwin, I think we'd have a better chance than just trying to 'out-contract' Portland, as I originally postulated.

What I'm saying is Kerrsed has the right idea; it's just about us having the right pieces to make it work. Hi idea was better than mine, which was to try to make the contract 'unsignable' by Portland. You brought up some good points about the Blazer's ownership, etc., so I think Harkless is worth more than what his offensive production has shown, but why can't Goodwin, since he has little value to us, but being 21, may hold better value for a different team that might feel a change in scenery/coaching may work, plus whatever else...Tucker?? IDK. But Goodwin holds some value...just not much with us, anymore.

We could hold onto him, sure, but is we try to get Harkless, Goodwin might be a good piece to throw in is all I'm saying.

Salaries matching are kind of inconsequential when everyone has massive cap space. You can just absorb salaries and they don't have to match. Only if both teams are exceeding or going to exceed the cap with the deal do they have to match.

Sure, I guess they may hold Goodwin in high regard for whatever reason, despite having Lillard, McCollum and Crabbe, plus Evan Turner who has mostly played SG. Goodwin likely wouldn't see the light of day and then would be ANOTHER RFA along with Crabbe next year.

I think a team like Brooklyn who is thin at guard after having Crabbe and Johnson matched, or even Philly could maybe like him, though I doubt he is even on most team's radar. If we think his #s suck, I can't see many or any GMs even giving him any consideration whatsoever.

I was thinking Goodwin as more of depth at PG than SG. Sadly, I think he might be better suited for PG with his handles. But you tell me, since I haven't seen enough to say I'm providing expert opinion on this, but Goodwin's shot is so broken, I think him slashing inside and dishing or getting fouled is his best move...

And thanks for the lesson on 'salary matching', but I thought you still had to match to within a certain amount, which is why I thought if we traded Knight/Goodwin, and Harkless was signed to something like a 4/$54M, or something, then could be traded since his salary would match, or come close enough to Knight/Goodwin. Is that not the case??

[dremill24]

Goodwin is a very bad PG

[bwgood77]

I hear ya, but if you are going to have a one way player, it can't be your wing. He would make the whole team worse offensively, not just himself. A PF or C who plays closer to the basket, yea, Rodman, Ben Wallace, TT, or a Bismack, but not your 3, it would kill spacing. The drive and kick and pick and roll game would be dead, because you would not have a shooter who needs to be respected on the wing.

No thank you.


Tell Warren to tighten up his D. I heard he gained size and height.

I'm just saying he holds FAR more value than Goodwin. I think we could use some defense in situations, and I'd only want him ever on the floor with all shooters, like if you had Knight, Booker and Warren out there right now, it might be good to have Harkless at the 4 in such a scenario.

But like I've said in previous posts, after signing Dudley I don't think it's worth it. He is such a good versatile defender, that my hopes if we signed him (before we signed Dudley) was that his offense would come around. I likely wouldn't play him much though, particularly not to the expense of our own young guys, but if someone like Thompson or Paul were having an unstoppable game, he's a useful tool to have in your arsenal.

That statement makes sense to most fans, but recent events clearly show that today's NBA values players differently than in the past.

1. "Potential" is at an all-time high premium. (Crabbe)
2. Guards, especially 2's, are valued much more highly than in the past. (Crabbe)
3. SF's and traditional PF's don't seem to carry nearly the value.
4. C's are still really valuable, especially defensive centers that can hit the occasional 15 footer (at least in Laker land).

Not saying your statement is obviously wrong, just not as clear cut. GM's know what other players can do, even seldom used ones. Many fans derive their valuations from stats or from media-types who spout the same party-line without evaluating for themselves. Archie, has incredible speed and physical attributes. He might have a little more value than we think.

Guards that can shoot are valuable. Guards that can't shoot or efficiently pass are worthless. I just can't understand the rose colored glasses many put on with Goodwin. I can see him as a throw in for a bigger trade. I think Harkless hasn't been signed by Portland yet because they don't have to. They extended the QO. Harkless' agent likely still is working other teams and if not may come back and either try to negotiate a fair deal with Portland or take the QO. If a team pays him less than probably $12-$14 million a year, Portland will match it in an instant.

Even for those who want Harkless, I'm not sure how much they think he is worth financially. Defensive wings, imo, are extremely valuable and tough to come by. You have Leonard and George who are two way players of course, and then you have guys like Iguodala to slow down LeBron. Harkless has a great more value than some here might expect.

A decent comp might be an Andre Roberson who played an important role for OKC.

[dremill24]

I'd take Moe in a heartbeat. But it seems like the Blazers will match anything that isnt a max deal.

[bwgood77]

Not at all, that's why I said we'd have to throw in extra compensation. Trust me, I know Harkless is worth more than Goodwin, and likely Goodwin wouldn't even be the centerpiece...just a part to make the salaries work, etc., but if we engage Portland, with a pkg that included Goodwin, I think we'd have a better chance than just trying to 'out-contract' Portland, as I originally postulated.

What I'm saying is Kerrsed has the right idea; it's just about us having the right pieces to make it work. Hi idea was better than mine, which was to try to make the contract 'unsignable' by Portland. You brought up some good points about the Blazer's ownership, etc., so I think Harkless is worth more than what his offensive production has shown, but why can't Goodwin, since he has little value to us, but being 21, may hold better value for a different team that might feel a change in scenery/coaching may work, plus whatever else...Tucker?? IDK. But Goodwin holds some value...just not much with us, anymore.

We could hold onto him, sure, but is we try to get Harkless, Goodwin might be a good piece to throw in is all I'm saying.

Salaries matching are kind of inconsequential when everyone has massive cap space. You can just absorb salaries and they don't have to match. Only if both teams are exceeding or going to exceed the cap with the deal do they have to match.

Sure, I guess they may hold Goodwin in high regard for whatever reason, despite having Lillard, McCollum and Crabbe, plus Evan Turner who has mostly played SG. Goodwin likely wouldn't see the light of day and then would be ANOTHER RFA along with Crabbe next year.

I think a team like Brooklyn who is thin at guard after having Crabbe and Johnson matched, or even Philly could maybe like him, though I doubt he is even on most team's radar. If we think his #s suck, I can't see many or any GMs even giving him any consideration whatsoever.

I was thinking Goodwin as more of depth at PG than SG. Sadly, I think he might be better suited for PG with his handles. But you tell me, since I haven't seen enough to say I'm providing expert opinion on this, but Goodwin's shot is so broken, I think him slashing inside and dishing or getting fouled is his best move...

And thanks for the lesson on 'salary matching', but I thought you still had to match to within a certain amount, which is why I thought if we traded Knight/Goodwin, and Harkless was signed to something like a 4/$54M, or something, then could be traded since his salary would match, or come close enough to Knight/Goodwin. Is that not the case??

Oh, Knight AND Goodwin, if it put both of our teams over the cap, than we would have to match within a certain range. Evan Turner can play PG in a pinch for them. He's actually a much better facilitator than Knight or Goodwin. He has had triple doubles, and still averages over 4 assists a game at SG or SF. He averaged 6 apg his last year in college. Boston used him to back up and replace Rondo when he as out...thought he was much more suited than Bradley.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24735611/the-leader-to-replace-rajon-rondo-at-point-guard-is-evan-turner

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2297568-evan-turners-point-guard-play-proving-hes-not-traditional-nba-player

But I seriously doubt they would trade him for Knight AND Goodwin. They will probably have over $70 million a year locked into Lillard, McCollum and Crabbe next year. They most certainly don't need Knight and his salary.

[bwgood77]

I'd take Moe in a heartbeat. But it seems like the Blazers will match anything that isnt a max deal.

Yeah, that's what I've read, or it was more along the lines of "outrageous" deal. I don't think they will let him go. I can't believe people think he can be traded for a guard on THAT team. My guess is that they keep Harkless and if they decide to keep him long term and want to trade someone, they trade Crabbe or try to at some point. But right now they have cheap bigs so they are ok.

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

This is whole Moe Harkless discussion is ridiculous. Not worth the $$$. Won't be as good as Tucker will be this season. Our projected future at the 3 spot is TJ, with Booker and Bender behind him, and Dudley in the short-term as necessary. So no need for him, either.

MFW the fans want to trade a guy who averages 20, 5 and 4 for a guy who averages 6, 4 and 1":

I know you're all disappointed with Brandon and mock his "Almost an All-Star in the East" designation, but if you think Moe Harkless would EVER be an almost all-star in any conference, I say

Please.

[gaspar]

I am not using that highlight video as a benchmark tool or anything like that. I was just pointing out that Goodwin looked good that game and is the only guard this team has that has athleticism like that. Some people want to trade him for second round picks and I find that absurd. He is still only 21 and has barely had a chance to play and is still on his rookie deal. There is no point in giving him away when he has proven in the little amount he played that he is talented. I would definitely not give up on him.

Too me it is very simple. There are few players in the NBA that can shoot .400 for 3 pointers. Goodwin is not even close to .333 which is shooting .500 for 2 pointers and he is a bad free throw shooter at less than .700 which negates his slashing ability. If he has a poor showing in training camp and preseason he should be waived or traded. It is likely he would lose his spot to a player who has earned it by showing they can reliably hit the three and free throws from either the college or european game. No sense in having Goodwin ride the bench this season if he has shown no improvement in his shooting. There are better players to be had on the same cheap contract Archie is under. For example, Kyle Kuric shot .411 from three and .902 from the charity stripe in Europe in over 100 games and Ulis has already shown his ability in the summer league to run the point and play better defense. Archie's days are numbered and rightfully so. If I were a betting person Archie will not be playing for the Suns in 2016/2017.

This is just silly. Goodwin was a raw prospect when we drafted him. I'm sure McDonough knew that Archie won't be very productive for the duration of his rookie contract. Suns, like every team in the league have 15 roster spots. There is a place for Archie on this team. He deserves another chance.

[rsavaj]

I was a fan of the Harkless idea until we drafted two PFs. Not sure I want to sign a guy longterm at that position anymore.

Dudley seems like the perfect stopgap.

[King4Day]

This is whole Moe Harkless discussion is ridiculous. Not worth the $$$. Won't be as good as Tucker will be this season. Our projected future at the 3 spot is TJ, with Booker and Bender behind him, and Dudley in the short-term as necessary. So no need for him, either.

MFW the fans want to trade a guy who averages 20, 5 and 4 for a guy who averages 6, 4 and 1":

I know you're all disappointed with Brandon and mock his "Almost an All-Star in the East" designation, but if you think Moe Harkless would EVER be an almost all-star in any conference, I say

Please.

I hope a team offers Moe a pricy deal to force the Blazers' hand. If they sign these guys to mega deals, they will be cash strapped. They are a team that was supposed to be really bad last year. Because they weren't, they decided to try to make something out of it. If these young guys don't grow, they might end up regretting the deals in a couple years.

[Walt_Uoob]

I kind of don't want us to improve the PF spot right now anyway because I'm hoping roster imbalance is part of a subtle tanking plan. There are enough middling teams in the West that I do think we could be a playoff team, maybe even as we are already composed, and if that happens I'm all for a playoff push and maybe even some win-now moves during the season. But if we can be overmatched at the 4 when Dudley plays there and underexperienced when Bender/Chriss play there, we'll probably be competitive in most games but lose a lot of close ones and find ourselves a bit out of the playoff picture when the trade deadline comes, giving us a good narrative to trade Chandler/Knight/Tucker without appearing desperate and losing leverage.

[saintEscaton]

Archie doesn't have the mentality to buy into a system as a role player. I was hoping he would become a more dynamic KJ McDaniels but he is probably our worst defender which is saying something

[bigfoot]

I am not using that highlight video as a benchmark tool or anything like that. I was just pointing out that Goodwin looked good that game and is the only guard this team has that has athleticism like that. Some people want to trade him for second round picks and I find that absurd. He is still only 21 and has barely had a chance to play and is still on his rookie deal. There is no point in giving him away when he has proven in the little amount he played that he is talented. I would definitely not give up on him.

Too me it is very simple. There are few players in the NBA that can shoot .400 for 3 pointers. Goodwin is not even close to .333 which is shooting .500 for 2 pointers and he is a bad free throw shooter at less than .700 which negates his slashing ability. If he has a poor showing in training camp and preseason he should be waived or traded. It is likely he would lose his spot to a player who has earned it by showing they can reliably hit the three and free throws from either the college or european game. No sense in having Goodwin ride the bench this season if he has shown no improvement in his shooting. There are better players to be had on the same cheap contract Archie is under. For example, Kyle Kuric shot .411 from three and .902 from the charity stripe in Europe in over 100 games and Ulis has already shown his ability in the summer league to run the point and play better defense. Archie's days are numbered and rightfully so. If I were a betting person Archie will not be playing for the Suns in 2016/2017.

This is just silly. Goodwin was a raw prospect when we drafted him. I'm sure McDonough knew that Archie won't be very productive for the duration of his rookie contract. Suns, like every team in the league have 15 roster spots. There is a place for Archie on this team. He deserves another chance.

You need to look at the situation. We have seven guards under contract ... Bledsoe, Knight, Booker, Ulis, Barbosa, Goodwin, Jenkins

There is no way Goodwin earns minutes over Knight, Booker, or Barbosa at the SG nor Bledsoe at PG. Barbosa has more PG experience and Ulis is a far better floor general than Goodwin. He is not going to get any minutes unless someone gets injured. In fact, he is worse than Jenkins.

http://bkref.com/tiny/l8Ro6

Why would the Suns keep him over Jenkins? They have Jenkins under contract for two years on the cheap with team options both years. That's $1M savings for a better player. Or they could sign Kuric for two years on the cheap with a team option for the second year. People need to get real with Archie's potential. Sure he is athletic but he doesn't defend or shoot well. It doesn't make sense to keep him. Especially when he gets easily disgruntled over playing time.

[sunsbum]

I am not using that highlight video as a benchmark tool or anything like that. I was just pointing out that Goodwin looked good that game and is the only guard this team has that has athleticism like that. Some people want to trade him for second round picks and I find that absurd. He is still only 21 and has barely had a chance to play and is still on his rookie deal. There is no point in giving him away when he has proven in the little amount he played that he is talented. I would definitely not give up on him.

Too me it is very simple. There are few players in the NBA that can shoot .400 for 3 pointers. Goodwin is not even close to .333 which is shooting .500 for 2 pointers and he is a bad free throw shooter at less than .700 which negates his slashing ability. If he has a poor showing in training camp and preseason he should be waived or traded. It is likely he would lose his spot to a player who has earned it by showing they can reliably hit the three and free throws from either the college or european game. No sense in having Goodwin ride the bench this season if he has shown no improvement in his shooting. There are better players to be had on the same cheap contract Archie is under. For example, Kyle Kuric shot .411 from three and .902 from the charity stripe in Europe in over 100 games and Ulis has already shown his ability in the summer league to run the point and play better defense. Archie's days are numbered and rightfully so. If I were a betting person Archie will not be playing for the Suns in 2016/2017.

This is just silly. Goodwin was a raw prospect when we drafted him. I'm sure McDonough knew that Archie won't be very productive for the duration of his rookie contract. Suns, like every team in the league have 15 roster spots. There is a place for Archie on this team. He deserves another chance.

Who is he going to get a chance over? Ulis/bledsoe/knight/booker or barbosa? Archie is done here. A.) hes not that good and b.) he at least deserves a chance to play somewhere else if we arent going to use him. Id much rather fill that spot with a guy like kuric from summer league, cheaper and he actually has an NBA skill thats useful.

[sunsbum]

Too me it is very simple. There are few players in the NBA that can shoot .400 for 3 pointers. Goodwin is not even close to .333 which is shooting .500 for 2 pointers and he is a bad free throw shooter at less than .700 which negates his slashing ability. If he has a poor showing in training camp and preseason he should be waived or traded. It is likely he would lose his spot to a player who has earned it by showing they can reliably hit the three and free throws from either the college or european game. No sense in having Goodwin ride the bench this season if he has shown no improvement in his shooting. There are better players to be had on the same cheap contract Archie is under. For example, Kyle Kuric shot .411 from three and .902 from the charity stripe in Europe in over 100 games and Ulis has already shown his ability in the summer league to run the point and play better defense. Archie's days are numbered and rightfully so. If I were a betting person Archie will not be playing for the Suns in 2016/2017.

This is just silly. Goodwin was a raw prospect when we drafted him. I'm sure McDonough knew that Archie won't be very productive for the duration of his rookie contract. Suns, like every team in the league have 15 roster spots. There is a place for Archie on this team. He deserves another chance.

You need to look at the situation. We have seven guards under contract ... Bledsoe, Knight, Booker, Ulis, Barbosa, Goodwin, Jenkins

There is no way Goodwin earns minutes over Knight, Booker, or Barbosa at the SG nor Bledsoe at PG. Barbosa has more PG experience and Ulis is a far better floor general than Goodwin. He is not going to get any minutes unless someone gets injured. In fact, he is worse than Jenkins.

http://bkref.com/tiny/l8Ro6

Why would the Suns keep him over Jenkins? They have Jenkins under contract for two years on the cheap with team options both years. That's $1M savings for a better player. Or they could sign Kuric for two years on the cheap with a team option for the second year. People need to get real with Archie's potential. Sure he is athletic but he doesn't defend or shoot well. It doesn't make sense to keep him. Especially when he gets easily disgruntled over playing time.

Are you in my head brah?