2021-22 Season/Offseason Speculation

[Ghost of Kleine]

Evan Sidery (@esidery) Tweeted:
The Suns were 34-7 last season when Mikal Bridges attempted at least 10 shots. Over an 82-game sample size, that’s a 68-14 record.

Truly feels like Bridges taking a leap offensively next season could unlock the Suns’ true potential as a dominant force.

Read on Twitter

?s=20

If bridges and ayton had a bit more shot creation, we'd have been tough to stop

Was definitely hoping that Bridges was working on that this summer! Especially after working out with Dame Lillard! Perhaps he could pick up a few pointers too.

[Saberestar]

Read on Twitter

[Barkley6]

So rookie extension season is coming up soon.

It won't happen, but I'd personally let Ayton and Bridges play for their pay day this season, neither are signing cheap anyway, and it seems we've leveraged our title hopes on their improvement.

I totally agree with this. While I don’t think both are max players, I understand Ayton will get one and Mikal deserves a good pay but I do like the idea of seeing another year for both players. I think I’m gonna lay money on both players winning most improved next year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IV Point Play did a segment on the extensions on the latest pod that helped me put it into some decent perspective.

Ayton is going to get a max rookie extension for a couple main reasons,
1. He does things very few other big men can do.
When you look around the league, Ayton is possibly a better defender than Rudy Gobert, and much more versatile on offense. Gobert got the max extension, so it seems unlikely that Ayton wouldn't.
2. he had an outstanding playoffs.
Hard to argue with his most recent production in the toughest games of his career, and at 22, you expect he can continue to reach or exceed that level for the foreseeable future.
3. from his agents POV, there is no other reasonable candidate on the roster to get that second max rookie extension in the next few years, so why WOULDN'T they give it to Ayton?
Bridges, Cam and Stix aren't getting anywhere close to a max extension, so his agent is going to come with a "who're you saving it for?" mentality. Ayton showed up against Anthony Davis, Nikola Jokic and Giannis, and more than held his own. Pay the man.

Bridges is a little trickier, but what they ended up on was a 4 years/$90m with a player option in Year 4. That makes sense to me. Bridges is definitely someone I think we will regret not extending now if we let him go to RFA. It would not be unthinkable for him to become a 15-18ppg scorer next year, and continue to play high level defense, and possibly make an All Defensive team. Duncan Robinson, who I think we all agree is not as good of a player as Mikal, just got 5/$90. Mikal is also 2 years younger. With that in mind, I think 4/$90 makes a ton of sense. I also don't mind the player option in Year 4, because Paul will most likely be gone by that time, and so we'd have a lot more flexibility cap wise to bring back Mikal at a bigger number if he earned it.

[bwgood77]

So rookie extension season is coming up soon.

It won't happen, but I'd personally let Ayton and Bridges play for their pay day this season, neither are signing cheap anyway, and it seems we've leveraged our title hopes on their improvement.

I totally agree with this. While I don’t think both are max players, I understand Ayton will get one and Mikal deserves a good pay but I do like the idea of seeing another year for both players. I think I’m gonna lay money on both players winning most improved next year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IV Point Play did a segment on the extensions on the latest pod that helped me put it into some decent perspective.

Ayton is going to get a max rookie extension for a couple main reasons,
1. He does things very few other big men can do.
When you look around the league, Ayton is possibly a better defender than Rudy Gobert, and much more versatile on offense. Gobert got the max extension, so it seems unlikely that Ayton wouldn't.
2. he had an outstanding playoffs.
Hard to argue with his most recent production in the toughest games of his career, and at 22, you expect he can continue to reach or exceed that level for the foreseeable future.
3. from his agents POV, there is no other reasonable candidate on the roster to get that second max rookie extension in the next few years, so why WOULDN'T they give it to Ayton?
Bridges, Cam and Stix aren't getting anywhere close to a max extension, so his agent is going to come with a "who're you saving it for?" mentality. Ayton showed up against Anthony Davis, Nikola Jokic and Giannis, and more than held his own. Pay the man.

Bridges is a little trickier, but what they ended up on was a 4 years/$90m with a player option in Year 4. That makes sense to me. Bridges is definitely someone I think we will regret not extending now if we let him go to RFA. It would not be unthinkable for him to become a 15-18ppg scorer next year, and continue to play high level defense, and possibly make an All Defensive team. Duncan Robinson, who I think we all agree is not as good of a player as Mikal, just got 5/$90. Mikal is also 2 years younger. With that in mind, I think 4/$90 makes a ton of sense. I also don't mind the player option in Year 4, because Paul will most likely be gone by that time, and so we'd have a lot more flexibility cap wise to bring back Mikal at a bigger number if he earned it.

I thought their reasoning on the Bridges change was ideal. They were playing agent and GM and the GM offered 4/$100 and the agent said "ok, but we want a player option" and then the agent agreed taking $10 million off so he could have the player option.

I have a very hard time believing a player would give up $10 million to get a player option, particularly when he will probably never be a max player.

I don't expect him to get that much anyway. I kind of doubt he will even demand a player option. Maybe for negotiating tactics but all these guys love being here. I expect him more like 4/$90 or possibly a little less anyway.

[Frank Lee]

Really CP? You are addicted? After one trip?



Don’t eat the brown acid

[Barkley6]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Odd move at this point in the offseason.

[Barkley6]

I totally agree with this. While I don’t think both are max players, I understand Ayton will get one and Mikal deserves a good pay but I do like the idea of seeing another year for both players. I think I’m gonna lay money on both players winning most improved next year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IV Point Play did a segment on the extensions on the latest pod that helped me put it into some decent perspective.

Ayton is going to get a max rookie extension for a couple main reasons,
1. He does things very few other big men can do.
When you look around the league, Ayton is possibly a better defender than Rudy Gobert, and much more versatile on offense. Gobert got the max extension, so it seems unlikely that Ayton wouldn't.
2. he had an outstanding playoffs.
Hard to argue with his most recent production in the toughest games of his career, and at 22, you expect he can continue to reach or exceed that level for the foreseeable future.
3. from his agents POV, there is no other reasonable candidate on the roster to get that second max rookie extension in the next few years, so why WOULDN'T they give it to Ayton?
Bridges, Cam and Stix aren't getting anywhere close to a max extension, so his agent is going to come with a "who're you saving it for?" mentality. Ayton showed up against Anthony Davis, Nikola Jokic and Giannis, and more than held his own. Pay the man.

Bridges is a little trickier, but what they ended up on was a 4 years/$90m with a player option in Year 4. That makes sense to me. Bridges is definitely someone I think we will regret not extending now if we let him go to RFA. It would not be unthinkable for him to become a 15-18ppg scorer next year, and continue to play high level defense, and possibly make an All Defensive team. Duncan Robinson, who I think we all agree is not as good of a player as Mikal, just got 5/$90. Mikal is also 2 years younger. With that in mind, I think 4/$90 makes a ton of sense. I also don't mind the player option in Year 4, because Paul will most likely be gone by that time, and so we'd have a lot more flexibility cap wise to bring back Mikal at a bigger number if he earned it.

I thought their reasoning on the Bridges change was ideal. They were playing agent and GM and the GM offered 4/$100 and the agent said "ok, but we want a player option" and then the agent agreed taking $10 million off so he could have the player option.

I have a very hard time believing a player would give up $10 million to get a player option, particularly when he will probably never be a max player.

I don't expect him to get that much anyway. I kind of doubt he will even demand a player option. Maybe for negotiating tactics but all these guys love being here. I expect him more like 4/$90 or possibly a little less anyway.

I think it makes sense to demand a PO for a player who has yet to reach his ceiling. Bridges might be worth $20m or so a season now, but in 3 years it's likely he's worth more than that, especially as the cap goes up and salaries go higher. Maybe not max money, but still a pay raise. If he was the finished product, I'd say yeah a player option doesn't make a ton of sense, but the ability for him to continue to grow over the course of that contract makes the player option seem reasonable.

To put it a different way, if Mikal becomes a guy that can create off the dribble, which is something we all genuinely think he can add to his game, then he likely is going to command a lot closer to max money and a Kawhi-lite, or Jimmy Butler type player. He wants the flexibility to go out and get that type of $$ as soon as possible.

[Blonde]

Only logical reason to waive Ty-shon is if we’re doing a favor for him and his agent because he won’t get any playing time here and we don’t have an official g-league affiliate. I know it’s just a minor thing but our complete lack of attention to development on the back end of the roster is infuriating. Both 2 way spots are now open.

[Barkley6]

Only logical reason to waive Ty-shon is if we’re doing a favor for him and his agent because he won’t get any playing time here and we don’t have an official g-league affiliate. I know it’s just a minor thing but our complete lack of attention to development on the back end of the roster is infuriating. Both 2 way spots are now open.

Not having the G-League affiliate anymore is one of the dumber things Sarver has done. It makes it five times as hard as the teams who have them to develop talent. I realize that we are less concerned about finding diamonds in the rough than we were a couple years ago, but it's just such short term thinking.

[bwgood77]

IV Point Play did a segment on the extensions on the latest pod that helped me put it into some decent perspective.

Ayton is going to get a max rookie extension for a couple main reasons,
1. He does things very few other big men can do.
When you look around the league, Ayton is possibly a better defender than Rudy Gobert, and much more versatile on offense. Gobert got the max extension, so it seems unlikely that Ayton wouldn't.
2. he had an outstanding playoffs.
Hard to argue with his most recent production in the toughest games of his career, and at 22, you expect he can continue to reach or exceed that level for the foreseeable future.
3. from his agents POV, there is no other reasonable candidate on the roster to get that second max rookie extension in the next few years, so why WOULDN'T they give it to Ayton?
Bridges, Cam and Stix aren't getting anywhere close to a max extension, so his agent is going to come with a "who're you saving it for?" mentality. Ayton showed up against Anthony Davis, Nikola Jokic and Giannis, and more than held his own. Pay the man.

Bridges is a little trickier, but what they ended up on was a 4 years/$90m with a player option in Year 4. That makes sense to me. Bridges is definitely someone I think we will regret not extending now if we let him go to RFA. It would not be unthinkable for him to become a 15-18ppg scorer next year, and continue to play high level defense, and possibly make an All Defensive team. Duncan Robinson, who I think we all agree is not as good of a player as Mikal, just got 5/$90. Mikal is also 2 years younger. With that in mind, I think 4/$90 makes a ton of sense. I also don't mind the player option in Year 4, because Paul will most likely be gone by that time, and so we'd have a lot more flexibility cap wise to bring back Mikal at a bigger number if he earned it.

I thought their reasoning on the Bridges change was ideal. They were playing agent and GM and the GM offered 4/$100 and the agent said "ok, but we want a player option" and then the agent agreed taking $10 million off so he could have the player option.

I have a very hard time believing a player would give up $10 million to get a player option, particularly when he will probably never be a max player.

I don't expect him to get that much anyway. I kind of doubt he will even demand a player option. Maybe for negotiating tactics but all these guys love being here. I expect him more like 4/$90 or possibly a little less anyway.

I think it makes sense to demand a PO for a player who has yet to reach his ceiling. Bridges might be worth $20m or so a season now, but in 3 years it's likely he's worth more than that, especially as the cap goes up and salaries go higher. Maybe not max money, but still a pay raise. If he was the finished product, I'd say yeah a player option doesn't make a ton of sense, but the ability for him to continue to grow over the course of that contract makes the player option seem reasonable.

To put it a different way, if Mikal becomes a guy that can create off the dribble, which is something we all genuinely think he can add to his game, then he likely is going to command a lot closer to max money and a Kawhi-lite, or Jimmy Butler type player. He wants the flexibility to go out and get that type of $$ as soon as possible.

Not sure why I wrote "ideal' in there, but meant ridiciulous. I agree Bridges will get better and worth more, but if he is already making $22.5 million or so anyway, in his next contract I still doubt he goes over $27.5 million a year or so regardless. He doesn't feel like he will be a $30 million + type player.

Besides, what you really have to consider is that getting that player option in your last year while giving up $10 million, you basically have to make up that entire $10 million in the first year of your next contract (over what you would have gotten in your last year of this one)...which is very unlikely, and there is probably a good chance after 4 years he would be worth even more than after 3 years, if only simply because the cap rising every year.

[bwgood77]

Only logical reason to waive Ty-shon is if we’re doing a favor for him and his agent because he won’t get any playing time here and we don’t have an official g-league affiliate. I know it’s just a minor thing but our complete lack of attention to development on the back end of the roster is infuriating. Both 2 way spots are now open.

Yeah, I don't think they waive him unless he requested it.

[hauntedkiwi]

We're probably going to spend the next few seasons without having signed anyone to the two way slot.

There is no justification for the neglect shown for free roster spots

There are only three explanations.

1) Cheapness

2) Laziness

3) Incompetence

They're free. It's like being in one of those money blowing booths, but not catching any because you are too lazy to move your arms.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Frank Lee]

Only logical reason to waive Ty-shon is if we’re doing a favor for him and his agent because he won’t get any playing time here and we don’t have an official g-league affiliate. I know it’s just a minor thing but our complete lack of attention to development on the back end of the roster is infuriating. Both 2 way spots are now open.

Not having the G-League affiliate anymore is one of the dumber things Sarver has done. It makes it five times as hard as the teams who have them to develop talent. I realize that we are less concerned about finding diamonds in the rough than we were a couple years ago, but it's just such short term thinking.

We bought in to the short term game the day we signed CP. G league is an over rated place to develop players, but a good place to find them.

All 28 NBA G League teams are singly affiliated with an NBA franchise, but that does not mean that NBA franchises own exclusive rights to all of the players on their NBA G League roster (like in Major League Baseball).

Outside of Two-Way Players and players on NBA Assignment, the majority of players in the NBA G League are available for any of the 30 NBA teams to sign (call up); these NBA G League players have signed contracts with the league rather than their individual team, so by NBA standards they are technically free agents.

This is why, for example, the Miami Heat could call up a Memphis Grizzlies “prospect” from the Grizzlies’ affiliate — as they did in 2014 when they signed center Hassan Whiteside. All 28 NBA G League teams are singly affiliated with an NBA franchise, but that does not mean that NBA franchises own exclusive rights to all of the players on their NBA G League roster (like in Major League Baseball).

Outside of Two-Way Players and players on NBA Assignment, the majority of players in the NBA G League are available for any of the 30 NBA teams to sign (call up); these NBA G League players have signed contracts with the league rather than their individual team, so by NBA standards they are technically free agents.

This is why, for example, the Miami Heat could call up a Memphis Grizzlies “prospect” from the Grizzlies’ affiliate — as they did in 2014 when they signed center Hassan Whiteside.

Our two way guys more likely to practice with the team anyways.

[King4Day]

This could also mean we have our eyes on another player for the 2 way. I wouldn't judge this harshly right now.

[Ghost of Kleine]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Odd move at this point in the offseason.

Have to wonder if they have someone specific in mind they expect to be waived. OR they're already working on the framework for a trade in which they'd take back an additional young prospect/ player in the deal for a specific veteran??

[Ghost of Kleine]

Suns JAM Session Podcast (@SunsJAM) Tweeted:
225. Jammin' with Flex From Jersey https://t.co/vRatv3keiF

Read on Twitter

?s=20

[hauntedkiwi]

This could also mean we have our eyes on another player for the 2 way. I wouldn't judge this harshly right now.

This would be believable if the Suns had used more than one two way slot at a time in the last three years.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Ghost of Kleine]

Matt Petersen (@TheMattPetersen) Tweeted:
Suns letting most of their exceptions go unused (so far) and now discarding their final pretense at G League development does not scream “all in” to me

Read on Twitter

?s=20

[RedIndian]

We're probably going to spend the next few seasons without having signed anyone to the two way slot.

There is no justification for the neglect shown for free roster spots

There are only three explanations.

1) Cheapness

2) Laziness

3) Incompetence

They're free. It's like being in one of those money blowing booths, but not catching any because you are too lazy to move your arms.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I'll have a guess and tell you that it's penny pinching.

Every move we've made over the last 18 monthd has been to save money.

- sell our G-league team
- dump the #29 and Carter's 2 years for a 1 year guy in Shamet. Saves us significant money this year and next
- use the MLE to add players on 1 year deals when we could have got a solid rotation player if we were willing to hand out a 3 or 4 year deal
- haven't used the BAE in 2 years
- grab Payne on a massive discount
- waive Ty-Shon for no conceivable reason

If the trend continues, next up is us cheaping out on the Ayton and Bridges extensions.

Sarver is happy as long as we're competitive. CP3 ensures that, but there seems to be no real interest in either paying the tax and REALLY going for the title.

Neither is there any interest to simultaneously develop some young talent on the cheap. You know, in case, CP3 ages too fast, or we get some unforeseen injuries. That part is as much on Jones as it is on Sarver.

[Ghost of Kleine]

Evan Sidery (@esidery) Tweeted:
The Suns sold their G League team last summer and now released their only player on a two-way contract since 2020.

Phoenix seems to be punting completely on the idea of player development on the G League level moving forward. A head-scratching decision, if so.

Read on Twitter

?s=20