RealGM

I didn't see a thread about this article (which surprised me) so here:
http://www.azcentral.com/sports/suns/ar ... pbeat.html

"I feel we have the talent to be a playoff team," Sarver said. "We just have to bring it all together and get more consistency."

rofl, this is basically him admitting a playoff team that can draw fans and churn a profit every year is all he cares about. You don't see him mention championship once.

He touts how the team is the only one besides Dallas, Denver and San Antonio to have winning records for the past six seasons.

More about winning records and staying competitive.

"The two main reasons for why I'd like to see Steve stay here is he's still the best player and most important player on the team and, in addition, we've got a lot history together. That means something."

every time Sarver or Babby talk to the media it ends with polishing Steve Nash's knob in one way or another as if Suns fans are all brainless idiots who will be satisfied with "slurp Steve Nash slurp slurp" as the answer to all of their questions. I personally find it to be an insult to the fans' intelligence, but the old people who still buy tickets and put money in Sarver's pocket apparently are brainless idiots who are satisfied with "Steve Nash is incredible" as the answer to every question.

What is he supposed to say?

"We suck. We're not good anymore. Yeah, we're pretty much epic fail. You guys probably shouldn't waste your time on us anymore."

Seriously...what is he supposed to say exactly?

rsavaj wrote:What is he supposed to say?

"We suck. We're not good anymore. Yeah, we're pretty much epic fail. You guys probably shouldn't waste your time on us anymore."

Seriously...what is he supposed to say exactly?

I'd rather him not say anything at all then just blow sunshine up everyone's *** with stuff that's so stupid it causes fans to lose even more faith in him. Do you really want to hear about how he's using an "advanced analytics team" to make basketball decisions?

"Yeah, we're a horrible team." Said Sarver.

"We just suck, they're not making me mon-, winning games".

rsavaj wrote:What is he supposed to say?

"We suck. We're not good anymore. Yeah, we're pretty much epic fail. You guys probably shouldn't waste your time on us anymore."

Seriously...what is he supposed to say exactly?

Completely agree.

But at the same time, of course I'm hoping that in his head he's starting to realize the reality of the situation

Oh and call me crazy but I'm pretty sure Sarver believes every single one of those stupid comments, but hopefully for the sake of the Suns he knows how stupid his comments are.

Just got out of the car, I was listening to xtra 910 sports on the radio...Bickley was comparing the FItzgerald situation to the Suns not re-signing Amar'e. One of the dumbest things I've ever heard on the radio. People are just making ways up to sh** on Sarver at this point.

Slowly creeping into Donald Sterling territory, just saying.

GD2 wrote:I personally find it to be an insult to the fans' intelligence, but the old people who still buy tickets and put money in Sarver's pocket apparently are brainless idiots who are satisfied with "Steve Nash is incredible" as the answer to every question.

Those brainless idiots are a reason we have a team. They buy season tickets even during a time when the economy is crushing us and hardly anyone can afford it. You should be a little more damn respectful. I guarantee 9/10 of the people on these boards bitching incessantly watch the games on ATDHE and the like and don't spend a dime on the Suns outside of a jersey they probably bought in 04-'05 or ''92-'93. It's lame and really freakin' annoying. You're right to direct your ire at Sarver, but you should leave the people that pay to support the team alone.

IF SARVER FEELS NASH IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PLAYER HE SHOULD GIVE NASH WHAT HE WANTS, A DAMN PF

GD2 wrote:Oh and call me crazy but

You're crazy.

I'm getting pretty damn tired of this Sarver hate. There is a ton of stuff you could criticize about his tenure, but we are in this situation because Amare left - and Amare was given a very fair offer. Trading for Turk (like the Shaq trade) was high-risk, high-reward, and they didn't work out. But bitching him out because he was too cheery?

People like this haven't been Suns fans long enough to know that, from time to time, your team is gonna suck (insert the exception for the Lakers here, and all related conspiracy theories). Yes, Sarver is trying to make some money - why? Because when you're looking at BIG money, that BIG money goes both ways.

With a huge, multimillion dollar organization, going just a "teeny bit" into the red means going $10,000,000 into the red. Then you lose stuff like Suns.com, Destination Phoenix '09 getting a red carpet, open media practices. And you get even more sh-tty ads for Taco Bell.

Has he made some horrid decisions? HELL yeah. Were they made in good faith? YES. And that's what you babies are not giving him, when you post adolescent bull like this:

RunSunRun wrote:Slowly creeping into Donald Sterling territory, just saying.

KLEON wrote:IF SARVER FEELS NASH IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PLAYER HE SHOULD GIVE NASH WHAT HE WANTS, A DAMN PF

WHO!? Why, I just happen to have Dwight Howard and LeBron James UP MY BUTT. They tell me they want to sign for the vet minimum. We should do that.

/rant

impulsenine GO F**K YOURSELF


Are you serious? come on man, there's no need to get personal on these forums. Warning sent.

-Miklo

carey wrote:Those brainless idiots are a reason we have a team. They buy season tickets even during a time when the economy is crushing us and hardly anyone can afford it. You should be a little more damn respectful. I guarantee 9/10 of the people on these boards bitching incessantly watch the games on ATDHE and the like and don't spend a dime on the Suns outside of a jersey they probably bought in 04-'05 or ''92-'93. It's lame and really freakin' annoying. You're right to direct your ire at Sarver, but you should leave the people that pay to support the team alone.

Quoted for truth.

I do wish I could join their ranks.

I know at least some of the guys on the board spend some dough on the Suns, though -- not to mention the Destination Phoenix guys (uhh, thanks again for all those girly drinks at Hooters... ).

impulsenine wrote:

GD2 wrote:Oh and call me crazy but

You're crazy.

I'm getting pretty damn tired of this Sarver hate. There is a ton of stuff you could criticize about his tenure, but we are in this situation because Amare left - and Amare was given a very fair offer. Trading for Turk (like the Shaq trade) was high-risk, high-reward, and they didn't work out. But bitching him out because he was too cheery?

People like this haven't been Suns fans long enough to know that, from time to time, your team is gonna suck (insert the exception for the Lakers here, and all related conspiracy theories). Yes, Sarver is trying to make some money - why? Because when you're looking at BIG money, that BIG money goes both ways.

With a huge, multimillion dollar organization, going just a "teeny bit" into the red means going $10,000,000 into the red. Then you lose stuff like Suns.com, Destination Phoenix '09 getting a red carpet, open media practices. And you get even more sh-tty ads for Taco Bell.

Has he made some horrid decisions? HELL yeah. Were they made in good faith? YES. And that's what you babies are not giving him, when you post adolescent bull like this:

RunSunRun wrote:Slowly creeping into Donald Sterling territory, just saying.

KLEON wrote:IF SARVER FEELS NASH IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PLAYER HE SHOULD GIVE NASH WHAT HE WANTS, A DAMN PF

WHO!? Why, I just happen to have Dwight Howard and LeBron James UP MY BUTT. They tell me they want to sign for the vet minimum. We should do that.

/rant

Amare wasn't given a fair offer. His NBA market value was a 5 year, fully guaranteed max level deal. Partially guaranteed contracts are a very rare occurrence in the NBA. You think Amare got a "fair" offer because you've heard from Sarver talking heads like Gambo or Coro that it was fair, but there's a reason Amare had no issue getting the contract he wanted, it's because that contract is market value for Amare.

impulsenine wrote:WHO!? Why, I just happen to have Dwight Howard and LeBron James UP MY BUTT. They tell me they want to sign for the vet minimum. We should do that.

/rant

He had a trade exception that coulda been used on Al Jefferson or in a sign and trade for David Lee or Carlos Boozer. Instead he split it between a bunch of scrub wing players.

Also, there was this PF on the Suns last year named Amare. I here he's pretty good.

GD2 wrote:Amare wasn't given a fair offer. His NBA market value was a 5 year, fully guaranteed max level deal. Partially guaranteed contracts are a very rare occurrence in the NBA. You think Amare got a "fair" offer because you've heard from Sarver talking heads like Gambo or Coro that it was fair.

We can disagree on whether it was a good idea to offer it, but I think we can agree that it made sense - it wasn't a "disrespect" kind of offer (think Nash in Dallas). It was a "I don't know if your knees will still function a half-decade from now but I'll pay you crazy money if they do" kind of offer.

GD2 wrote:He had a trade exception that coulda been used on Al Jefferson or in a sign and trade for David Lee or Carlos Boozer. Instead he split it between a bunch of scrub wing players.

Well...

impulsenine in the original post in order to avoid having to write this wrote:Has he made some horrid decisions? HELL yeah.

Again, I'm not defending his decisions. But saying that he's a horrible person for being optimistic in an interview, or that he's turning into Donald Sterling is pointless hyperbole that reeks of "new fan who's been spoiled by a VERY long winning streak."

Let's at least (figuratively) beat the bejeesus out of him for what he has actually done.

EDIT: Boy, I'm glad I toned down my original rant, which included the word "panties".

impulsenine wrote:

GD2 wrote:Oh and call me crazy but

You're crazy.

I'm getting pretty damn tired of this Sarver hate. There is a ton of stuff you could criticize about his tenure, but we are in this situation because Amare left - and Amare was given a very fair offer. Trading for Turk (like the Shaq trade) was high-risk, high-reward, and they didn't work out. But bitching him out because he was too cheery?

Shaq trade WAS high-risk high-reward. We needed a post player at the time. We needed some size. As Steve Kerr said so himself, the trade would either make him look like a genius or a moron. I wholeheartedly agree. It just didn't work out that time, and really most of the blame should have gone to Terry Porter.

Trading for Hedo? His contract is a joke. His play (prior to the glorious return to Orlando) is abysmal at best. We didn't even ask for a 1st rounder in return. We were already overloaded with wings and so so desperately need a decent post player. That trade is a big fat joke. There is no way you can justify that. "OH HEY WE SHOULD GRAB HEDO SO WE CAN OVERLOAD ON THIS ONE POSITION OR MAYBE MAKE HIM PLAY IN THE POST WHERE HE'LL GET ABUSED." WTF? Seriously?

People like this haven't been Suns fans long enough to know that, from time to time, your team is gonna suck (insert the exception for the Lakers here, and all related conspiracy theories). Yes, Sarver is trying to make some money - why? Because when you're looking at BIG money, that BIG money goes both ways.

With a huge, multimillion dollar organization, going just a "teeny bit" into the red means going $10,000,000 into the red. Then you lose stuff like Suns.com, Destination Phoenix '09 getting a red carpet, open media practices. And you get even more sh-tty ads for Taco Bell.

Don't own a team if you're expecting to make money. Period. 1/3 of the teams are making losses. Orlando Magic's owner is just throwing money into water, knowing that he'll not going to get anything back. Mark Cuban knows as well. Basically, we made it this far over the last few years because we were lucky enough to have this one player who's named Steve Nash.

Has he made some horrid decisions? HELL yeah. Were they made in good faith? YES. And that's what you babies are not giving him, when you post adolescent bull like this:

RunSunRun wrote:Slowly creeping into Donald Sterling territory, just saying.

KLEON wrote:IF SARVER FEELS NASH IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PLAYER HE SHOULD GIVE NASH WHAT HE WANTS, A DAMN PF

WHO!? Why, I just happen to have Dwight Howard and LeBron James UP MY BUTT. They tell me they want to sign for the vet minimum. We should do that.

/rant

You know there's this one thing call free agency period. And you know there are some UFA who happen to be PFs last year. Oh and how the T'Wolves got Beasley? Somebody remind me that.

Bottom line: Not re-signing Amar'e is understandable. Not finding a replacement in that position and instead fill up roster spots with wing players is not acceptable.

You're just heartless for wanting to watch Steve Nash end his career with this team of (mostly) scrubs and an ownership which really isn't an ownership.

Btw, Sarver does sound over optimistic even considering it's for the press. He could have been more subtle.

As for this one:

reeks of "new fan who's been spoiled by a VERY long winning streak."

I'll just have to say that it's pretty frustrating to watch teams which made a huge playoff run trying to get better (uhh, not Orlando Magic?) whereas we, on the other hand, send close to half of the rotation players packing bags right after our (so-called) franchise player, who is not treated like one, went public and asked the ownership to keep the team intact.
*ZING*

Y'all don't seem to be reading.

I didn't like the trades, either (although hindsight, etc.).

But to call him out for being too chipper is silly.

impulsenine wrote:We can disagree on whether it was a good idea to offer it, but I think we can agree that it made sense - it wasn't a "disrespect" kind of offer (think Nash in Dallas). It was a "I don't know if your knees will still function a half-decade from now but I'll pay you crazy money if they do" kind of offer.

It wasn't a disrespectful offer but expecting Amare to leave $40,000,000 of guaranteed money on the table didn't make sense. Expecting Amare to be the one star or even borderline star player in the NBA to accept a partially guaranteed deal is an example of how little Sarver knows about the NBA.

It's even more laughable to call Dallas's offer to Nash in 2004 disrespectful. People love to revise history and say Dallas didn't wanna match Phoenix's offer for a 2 time MVP. At the time, Nash was a 30 year old point guard with back problems who had his worst statistical season in 4 years and who at his best was a borderline 3rd all NBA team member. Meanwhile Dallas was a team that just lost in the 1st round largely due to how badly Nash was outplayed by Bibby. The proof is in the pudding that how Dallas handled it was reasonable regardless of how Nash did in Phoenix. The following 3 years (2005-2007) after Nash left Dallas, they were closer to a championship than they ever were with Nash.

impulsenine wrote:

impulsenine in the original post in order to avoid having to write this wrote:Has he made some horrid decisions? HELL yeah.

Again, I'm not defending his decisions. But saying that he's a horrible person for being optimistic in an interview, or that he's turning into Donald Sterling is pointless hyperbole that reeks of "new fan who's been spoiled by a VERY long winning streak."

Let's at least (figuratively) beat the bejeesus out of him for what he has actually done.

EDIT: Boy, I'm glad I toned down my original rant, which included the word "panties".

You are defending his decisions, you keep saying that his decision not to much the Knicks' offer made perfect sense when it's blatantly obvious it didn't. Don't start back pedaling now and resorting to random bandwagon smack.

If the team was simply getting old, could never get over the hump and the team was naturally on the decline, yeah, the fans who complain would be spoiled. However, fans have every right to whine incessantly when the owner breaks up a team that was 2 games from the NBA finals and decides to replace said team's best player with a bunch of role players.

In defense of Sarver though, Colangelo was just as bad about breaking up teams prematurely and never giving them a real chance to build as a group. The 1983 Suns were a team that played great defense and had legitimate size but lost early in the playoffs because of a Maurice Lucas injury. Rather than give that team another year to mature and see what they could do with more experience as a team and better luck come playoff time, Colangelo decides to trade Dennis Johnson for Rick Robey because "the Suns needed size" even though they had quality size with Mo Lucas, James Edwards and Alvan Adams. Sure enough, the next season they had better luck, made the WCF and competed with the Lakers in spite of being a worse team, but ultimately lost because of Kyle Macy (the replacement for DJ) got destroyed by Magic. So if you think I'm one of those people who hate on Sarver non-stop and revise history about how great Colangelo was (and yes, these are fans who usually started watching in 2005), I'm not, I'm irate at Sarver for the same reasons I was often irate at Colangelo.

impulsenine wrote:Y'all don't seem to be reading.

I didn't like the trades, either (although hindsight, etc.).

But to call him out for being too chipper is silly.

I didn't really mean to call him out for being chipper, I was more calling him out for choosing his words oh so carefully that he didn't direct any blame at himself, and also for expecting fans to take what he said seriously. Both things I interpret as an insult to my intelligence.