The Trade Thread: All Eyes Toward The Offseason

[saintEscaton]

Crying over spilt milk is our pastime

[JMac1]

But that is more about the players on the roster than the owner isn't it. They have KAT, Wiggins, and Levine, plus a lottery pick this year. The TWolves are a little closer to really competing than the Suns.

Everything looks good on paper. Call me when you are winning.

Minny is considered the better job because Minny has KAT, plain and simple. He is looking like a generational talent--a Duncan, a Hakeem. They also have lots of good young pieces around him. That appeals to a coach.

DBook is a nice piece, but not KAT.

They have KAT not Shaq. I like KAT, but until he demands double teams consistently and is putting up 27-30 points a game in a guard dominated league, I am not buying what Windhorst is selling. Lavine is not Kobe, Wiggins is not Lebron and KAT is not Duncan; they have potential but until they are doing something you are taking a chance and living in Minnesota at the same time. I remember when Portland was the place to be and then OKC, no one ever saw GS becoming the team they became.......all of a sudden.

Point is, relax on the hype train. "omg, omg, we suck and Minny is the chit".....is a little premature. No one lives in Minny by choice like they do Phoenix, don't forget that as well.

[NavLDO]

But that is more about the players on the roster than the owner isn't it. They have KAT, Wiggins, and Levine, plus a lottery pick this year. The TWolves are a little closer to really competing than the Suns.

Everything looks good on paper. Call me when you are winning.

Minny is considered the better job because Minny has KAT, plain and simple. He is looking like a generational talent--a Duncan, a Hakeem. They also have lots of good young pieces around him. That appeals to a coach.

DBook is a nice piece, but not KAT.

And this is what I was referring to a few weeks back when I mentioned that the Suns would be wise to follow the type of 'team building' that Minny has employed. Granted, they do have, and did have, a better talent base to start with, than we do...BUT...we do have some core pieces we can build around.

Booker is not KAT, you are right, but he's not likely far behind Wiggins. To me, this off-season, more than past ones, is critical to our future. IF we do nothing but draft, then we are missing the boat, IMO. Booker may not be KAT, true, but he's received a ton of national-level press, and McD needs to take advantage of that. There are players that will be excited about coming to play with the 19YO phenom, and would like to be part of a young, growing team. Then hire Watson as the HC on a 3 year contract, as he's largely seen/viewed as a 'player's coach', which to me, if I'm a FA, or on the trade block from a team, I'm wanting to be part of that environment. Yes, many players view the Suns and Sarver as a joke, and would want to play for an established playoff HC; but don't think for a second that there aren't players that want to be part of a team on the upswing--be part of a team where the GM is active in his pursuits to better the team and isn't afraid to take a gamble here or there.

So that said, these are the players I would keep; everyone else needs to go somehow, while teams have cap space to play with.

CORE/Must Keep's:

Len--A Double-Double machine when given minutes, more often than not, and has extended his range to some degree: Future?? Potential piece to a Big 3.
Leuer--Solid contributor, and a team without a starter-level player, the best of the bunch: Future?? Potential 6th Man.
Warren--High volume scorer that needs some serious development of his defensive game: Future?? Starter-level, likely not much more.
Booker--Young and exciting: Future?? All-Star
Bledsoe--When on the court, solid distributor and lane-driver: Future?? IMO, he's 5th best starter on a playoff team. If he's counted on to be more than that, the team will not likely be very good.
Goodwin--He's only 21 and still developing AND showing progress when given minutes: Future?? Bench combo PG/SG
Bogdanovic--At least until we see how his game translates into the NBA (for a whole season, not the typical for this forum, which is 5-10 games and we've made up our mind that a guy sucks ) he's a 'must-keep'. Future?? No clue, we'll see...

Then there's the 'meh' guys; the "If the price is right" types:

Teletovic--Exciting Stretch 4 that would be great to have on the bench
Alan Williams--Showed some promise late. Has potential to be a bench combo PF/C
Jenkins--Might be a decent back-up to Booker
Price--Dependable, yet not flashy. If he'll come back cheap, I'm all for it

And now, we get to the "Need to be GONE" types:

Chandler--It's not anything he's done, per se, but what he HASN'T done. He's too expensive, even with a $92M Cap, to be a bench 5 that gets 15-20 minutes a game
Tucker--We just need to move on from PJ. He's on a great deal for what he does, and will make a nice trade-filler piece
Knight--Honestly?? He's just simply in the way of Booker when Bledsoe's healthy; it's really just that simple.

That would leave between 6 and 10 players. Add in 3 draft picks (One surely to be a 'Euro-stash'), and that makes 13 Max.

I'm not the GM, of course, but I'm prepared to take on one or two bad contracts to relieve ourselves of Chandler, Knight, and Tucker. Sorry, but these 3 I see as holding us back. We need a fresh start this next season, and considering we 'fell apart' not soon after Bledsoe went down, I believe that Bledsoe is a core piece. One that we surround with good talent.

As fans, I think we need to recognize that Bledsoe and Warren--two players I consider to be starters/the future of our team--being out is essentially losing 40% of our starting core. That's a huge blow to any team. When one of those is your PG, that's even worse.

If we can 'extricate' ourselves of Tucker, Chandler, and Knight, and pay a draft pick or two for the 'service' in assisting the Suns in unloading these guys, then great; so long as it's not this year's lotto picks, or the two Miami picks, then I'm good with it. We may be good enough to be out of the lotto next year, if McD plays it right; so trading a mid-to-late teens pick next year, or our picks in the two years we have the Miami picks, I'm ok with that as well. I think it's every bit as important to trade these 3 players as it is to keep our core group...at least, that is how I feel about it today...which could completely change tomorrow or the next day...

But if we can go into next season looking like this:

Bledsoe/Price
Booker/Goodwin/Jenkins
Warren/Bogdanovic
(Simmons/Ellenson/Labissierre)/Leuer...OR...Leuer/(Bender/Chriss)...OR...Leuer/Teletovic/(Bender/Chriss)
Len/Williams

Then I think we have an outstanding Offensive team, yet woefully, Defensively-unprepared team, that I think will be able to score enough to get us that 8th seed. When your PG is your best defensive presence, then, well, your team has some defensive issues that need to be addressed.

OK, I've droned on long enough...

[TeamTragic]

The sour grapes, aside from the Tyson signing, are beyond unfounded.

Signing IT was great. We got a great talent at next to no money, and then traded him for a first. You could say we should have gotten more, but the reality is we just manufactured a first rounder. And boo hoo Goran left for 2 firsts. Goran is one of the worst contracts in basketball, and if signing IT forced us to trade him for 2 firsts, then it was the greatest move of the past 5 years.

The only people who have a right to have sour grapes here are the ones who honesty think that 48 win team was the start of a title contender, and I seriously question the basketball capacity of anybody thinking that.

[letsgosuns]

The reason so many fans are disappointed is because of two things. The first is that the Suns have sucked for years now and Suns fans are not used to that. This is a team that for virtually their entire history is a competitive team. They always make the playoffs. Rarely did the Suns not field a team with at least one star and provide an exciting product.

The second is that Sarver did not do everything he could to put the Suns in a position to win the title. He did not go all out. Instead he chose to make some cost cutting moves and not bring back guys like Tim Thomas and Eddie House and then traded Kurt Thomas (and picks) to save money. Can you imagine if the Suns had Tim Thomas and House off the bench on the 2006-07 team. The lineup would have been Nash, Bell, Marion, Amare, and K. Thomas with Diaw, Barbosa, T. Thomas, and House off the bench. A truly 9 deep team.

It was not some outrageous financial burden to bring back Thomas and House and Sarver just did not want to do it. And unfortunately the Suns never won a title with that phenomenally talented Nash, Amare, and Marion core. Now the team is awful and you got a guy like McDonough that says he is in disbelief the team sucked. Get real man. Your vision is flawed. Many people including myself said at the beginning this team was going to suck. So do not act so surprised that they did. To think how Colangelo builds a team compared to how Sarver/McDonough have built teams is mind boggling. Two small point guards, a small forward with no offensive game, a power forward who bad mouths the organization. Oh sure, I trust McDonough to turn this thing around. Right. Give me a break.

[SideSwipe]

The only people who have a right to have sour grapes here are the ones who honesty think that 48 win team was the start of a title contender, and I seriously question the basketball capacity of anybody thinking that.

A little perspective for you here....a 48 win team this year would have been the #5 seed. Some food for thought before questioning anyone's allusions regarding the potential for starting together additional pieces for a championship run. The fact is while that team did out-perform it's talent, that was a good team that year and was a great basis to talk to FA's and agents about trades. Year 1 of a playoff team gets you that. It begins a culture of winning. The unfortunate thing for the Suns is the East was atrociously bad that year which elevated everyone's numbers as well, and I believe the cutoff for the playoffs was 49 or 50 games, which is extremely high for the history of the league. Players want money and players want to win, usually in that order, but if you can find a place where you get money and a chance to win, that's what players run to, because they get additional respect. FA's and other players have to be convinced to go to losing programs.

[bwgood77]

The only people who have a right to have sour grapes here are the ones who honesty think that 48 win team was the start of a title contender, and I seriously question the basketball capacity of anybody thinking that.

A little perspective for you here....a 48 win team this year would have been the #5 seed. Some food for thought before questioning anyone's allusions regarding the potential for starting together additional pieces for a championship run. The fact is while that team did out-perform it's talent, that was a good team that year and was a great basis to talk to FA's and agents about trades. Year 1 of a playoff team gets you that. It begins a culture of winning. The unfortunate thing for the Suns is the East was atrociously bad that year which elevated everyone's numbers as well, and I believe the cutoff for the playoffs was 49 or 50 games, which is extremely high for the history of the league. Players want money and players want to win, usually in that order, but if you can find a place where you get money and a chance to win, that's what players run to, because they get additional respect. FA's and other players have to be convinced to go to losing programs.

Didn't the 3-6 seeds in the east this year also have 48 wins? I thought it was the right move to rebuild and trade vets but I do wonder how that team would have fared with Gortat instead of Plumlee. The IT signing and it ending up netting us a first round pick seems like an OK deal but it did result in an implosion of chemistry and a terrible product of which the quantifiable impact of fan support, free agents wanting to sign here, etc is tough to determine. Was it all worth it? I guess if the 27th pick is a good rotation player or important piece in a trade it might be but that's a lot to hope for and expect.

[AtheJ415]

The only people who have a right to have sour grapes here are the ones who honesty think that 48 win team was the start of a title contender, and I seriously question the basketball capacity of anybody thinking that.

A little perspective for you here....a 48 win team this year would have been the #5 seed. Some food for thought before questioning anyone's allusions regarding the potential for starting together additional pieces for a championship run. The fact is while that team did out-perform it's talent, that was a good team that year and was a great basis to talk to FA's and agents about trades. Year 1 of a playoff team gets you that. It begins a culture of winning. The unfortunate thing for the Suns is the East was atrociously bad that year which elevated everyone's numbers as well, and I believe the cutoff for the playoffs was 49 or 50 games, which is extremely high for the history of the league. Players want money and players want to win, usually in that order, but if you can find a place where you get money and a chance to win, that's what players run to, because they get additional respect. FA's and other players have to be convinced to go to losing programs.

A little perspective for you here--that team had 0, and I mean 0, chance to win a title, even if they were the 5 seed this year with Goran taking up a giant chunk of the salary cap to put up awful numbers. We had an average starting PG in this league in reality playing like an MVP candidate. That's how we lucked our way to 48 wins. The reality is Goran simply isn't as good as he played that year. It was his career year.

Talking to FAs and trades wrecks the chemistry. This was not an emotionally savvy and mature group of vets. This was a powder keg of immaturity that seemed gritty because everyone was happy all the time in their biggest roles ever. Forexample, the team's players hated it when we tried to improve and brought in better players. Marcus got a big head and resented Tucker. Markieff thought he was the premiere player and resented us going after Aldridge. Gerald complained about PT despite sucking for 3/4 of the season. Goran, IT, and Bledsoe hated playing together despite it statistically increasing our chances of winning. What makes you think we don't run into the same issues if we did bring in better players who usurped our squad of role players' roles?

And your point about players wanting money is exactly right, and it's exactly why that 48 win team wasn't a cornerstone for a title--because everyone was playing for a larger contract since everyone was in roles they never had been in with impending free agency. To get money you must put up numbers, which means you must have the ball and be on the court, which is why that team was destined to have chemistry issues if/when we brought in anyone better.

[saintEscaton]

Lets be honest its not like we are setting our sights higher even now, we aren't any closer to building a contender. Our goal is to have another fools gold Cinderella season to boost ticket sales so Sarver can waive his foam finger and tell us the cheese ain't cold no more.

[Walt_Uoob]

And now, we get to the "Need to be GONE" types:

Chandler--It's not anything he's done, per se, but what he HASN'T done. He's too expensive, even with a $92M Cap, to be a bench 5 that gets 15-20 minutes a game
Tucker--We just need to move on from PJ. He's on a great deal for what he does, and will make a nice trade-filler piece
Knight--Honestly?? He's just simply in the way of Booker when Bledsoe's healthy; it's really just that simple.

That would leave between 6 and 10 players. Add in 3 draft picks (One surely to be a 'Euro-stash'), and that makes 13 Max.

I'm not the GM, of course, but I'm prepared to take on one or two bad contracts to relieve ourselves of Chandler, Knight, and Tucker. Sorry, but these 3 I see as holding us back.

I like most of your post but strongly disagree that it makes sense to just dump those three for whatever, if that's what you're saying. If we can get a mid-first-round pick for Kieff, we can get players/picks of value for all three of those guys. Dumping Chandler for jack-squat would be depressingly similar to that Kurt Thomas dump we universally hate. If you mean we could trade those guys for future draft picks and take back some crappy contracts in the process, I could get on board with that, but no way should we have to or want to or be willing to give up those three without receiving real value in return.

[NavLDO]

And now, we get to the "Need to be GONE" types:

Chandler--It's not anything he's done, per se, but what he HASN'T done. He's too expensive, even with a $92M Cap, to be a bench 5 that gets 15-20 minutes a game
Tucker--We just need to move on from PJ. He's on a great deal for what he does, and will make a nice trade-filler piece
Knight--Honestly?? He's just simply in the way of Booker when Bledsoe's healthy; it's really just that simple.

That would leave between 6 and 10 players. Add in 3 draft picks (One surely to be a 'Euro-stash'), and that makes 13 Max.

I'm not the GM, of course, but I'm prepared to take on one or two bad contracts to relieve ourselves of Chandler, Knight, and Tucker. Sorry, but these 3 I see as holding us back.

I like most of your post but strongly disagree that it makes sense to just dump those three for whatever, if that's what you're saying. If we can get a mid-first-round pick for Kieff, we can get players/picks of value for all three of those guys. Dumping Chandler for jack-squat would be depressingly similar to that Kurt Thomas dump we universally hate. If you mean we could trade those guys for future draft picks and take back some crappy contracts in the process, I could get on board with that, but no way should we have to or want to or be willing to give up those three without receiving real value in return.

The latter, not the former. My point, is, we'll have to take on some contracts back if we are sending those contracts out, right? But yes, we should be able to get some compensation, but at the same time, no one is going to trade a good young player for Chandler or Knight; but they may trade a contract they'd like to get off the books long with some picks.

Sorry, I should have specified, but I didn't mean to straight PAY to get rid of them.

[AtheJ415]

And now, we get to the "Need to be GONE" types:

Chandler--It's not anything he's done, per se, but what he HASN'T done. He's too expensive, even with a $92M Cap, to be a bench 5 that gets 15-20 minutes a game
Tucker--We just need to move on from PJ. He's on a great deal for what he does, and will make a nice trade-filler piece
Knight--Honestly?? He's just simply in the way of Booker when Bledsoe's healthy; it's really just that simple.

That would leave between 6 and 10 players. Add in 3 draft picks (One surely to be a 'Euro-stash'), and that makes 13 Max.

I'm not the GM, of course, but I'm prepared to take on one or two bad contracts to relieve ourselves of Chandler, Knight, and Tucker. Sorry, but these 3 I see as holding us back.

I like most of your post but strongly disagree that it makes sense to just dump those three for whatever, if that's what you're saying. If we can get a mid-first-round pick for Kieff, we can get players/picks of value for all three of those guys. Dumping Chandler for jack-squat would be depressingly similar to that Kurt Thomas dump we universally hate. If you mean we could trade those guys for future draft picks and take back some crappy contracts in the process, I could get on board with that, but no way should we have to or want to or be willing to give up those three without receiving real value in return.

I agree. I hate Tucker as much as anyone, but he's worth a late first or early 2nd to a contender. His contract is nothing.

Knight's no longer a bad deal (we all know what salaries will do this offseason, and guys worse than him will get equal or more), and while I agree with the previous poster that it makes sense to move him, I see no point in taking a negative back when Knight's still young with a lot of talent. He's far from a finished product and that's just not the type of guy you dump for a negative. At best it ends up an equal move, and at worst you're kicking yourself for years.

Chandler I can see having to take a negative for. His deal will look less bad this offseason though, and my hope is a team needing leadership just takes him from us.

[Qwigglez]

^I know some people still believe Knight is on a bad contract but I would say it's a fair contract. Reggie Jackson is getting paid more than Knight and they average pretty similar numbers and Jackson is a year and a half older. We'll probably see Jeremy Lin and Dennis Schroeder (and possibly Ish Smith) get similar contracts if not get paid more than Knight. Rajon Rondo might be looking for his last fat paycheck. Point is, his contract isn't such a monstrosity as many of you are making it out to be.

[lilfishi22]

Knight's contract is fine. I just don't think having him on the Suns is going to help us move forward, especially with his selfish style of play.

[dremill24]

My trade targets over the next year:

Jonathan Simmons. Jamychal Green. Norman Powell. Josh Richardson.

Hustle players like Tucker are fine..but give me some pitbulls with athleticism and upside.

[jcsunsfan]

And now, we get to the "Need to be GONE" types:

Chandler--It's not anything he's done, per se, but what he HASN'T done. He's too expensive, even with a $92M Cap, to be a bench 5 that gets 15-20 minutes a game
Tucker--We just need to move on from PJ. He's on a great deal for what he does, and will make a nice trade-filler piece
Knight--Honestly?? He's just simply in the way of Booker when Bledsoe's healthy; it's really just that simple.

That would leave between 6 and 10 players. Add in 3 draft picks (One surely to be a 'Euro-stash'), and that makes 13 Max.

I'm not the GM, of course, but I'm prepared to take on one or two bad contracts to relieve ourselves of Chandler, Knight, and Tucker. Sorry, but these 3 I see as holding us back.

I like most of your post but strongly disagree that it makes sense to just dump those three for whatever, if that's what you're saying. If we can get a mid-first-round pick for Kieff, we can get players/picks of value for all three of those guys. Dumping Chandler for jack-squat would be depressingly similar to that Kurt Thomas dump we universally hate. If you mean we could trade those guys for future draft picks and take back some crappy contracts in the process, I could get on board with that, but no way should we have to or want to or be willing to give up those three without receiving real value in return.

The latter, not the former. My point, is, we'll have to take on some contracts back if we are sending those contracts out, right? But yes, we should be able to get some compensation, but at the same time, no one is going to trade a good young player for Chandler or Knight; but they may trade a contract they'd like to get off the books long with some picks.

Sorry, I should have specified, but I didn't mean to straight PAY to get rid of them.

You won't have to take on bad contracts if you wait until the free agency period. There will be lots of teams with the cap space to take on a player like Knight. And since the free agent pool is so thin, I would think you could get a potentially decent pick or picks.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[AtheJ415]

Lets be honest its not like we are setting our sights higher even now, we aren't any closer to building a contender. Our goal is to have another fools gold Cinderella season to boost ticket sales so Sarver can waive his foam finger and tell us the cheese ain't cold no more.

We are closer though. Booker, Warren, Len, and the guys we get with those future picks are certainly players you can win with. We're still far away from a title, but we're drastically closer to there than we were when McDonough came in. Our young talent is much better, and our pick stash is too (granted, we lost the Laker pick, but we don't know yet what pick that will turn into).

[MrMiyagi]

Lets be honest its not like we are setting our sights higher even now, we aren't any closer to building a contender. Our goal is to have another fools gold Cinderella season to boost ticket sales so Sarver can waive his foam finger and tell us the cheese ain't cold no more.

We are closer though. Booker, Warren, Len, and the guys we get with those future picks are certainly players you can win with. We're still far away from a title, but we're drastically closer to there than we were when McDonough came in. Our young talent is much better, and our pick stash is too (granted, we lost the Laker pick, but we don't know yet what pick that will turn into).

If the Lakers do not draft #1 I will be flabbergasted. I'm calling Lakers 1, Pelicans 2, Boston 3.

[Qwigglez]

^Wrong wiseman Miyagi, I saw a physic recently and she assured me the draft would go Lakers / Suns / Celtics.

[Saberestar]

^I know some people still believe Knight is on a bad contract but I would say it's a fair contract. Reggie Jackson is getting paid more than Knight and they average pretty similar numbers and Jackson is a year and a half older. We'll probably see Jeremy Lin and Dennis Schroeder (and possibly Ish Smith) get similar contracts if not get paid more than Knight. Rajon Rondo might be looking for his last fat paycheck. Point is, his contract isn't such a monstrosity as many of you are making it out to be.

Reggie Jackson is a better player than Knight, it is not even close. Numbers are not the true story, I do not care if Knight puts 20 points per game because I watch every game and I see his real impact on the game.

Reggie Jackson is better than Knight at everything but spot up shooting, just that.

Bledsoe and Reggie Jackson are on the same tier, but Jackson is even higher on that tier because he is not injury prone.