RealGM

Note: Please take the following with a grain of salt



So Amare... was it worth it?


Suns had a rough year. Knicks are under .500. He'd have gotten paid the same amount this year (and the next, and the next, and quite probably the following two). I can't help but wonder if he realizes he dun goofed.


Edit: If he'd have stayed, which changes would we have been able to make? We'd have still been able to do Barbs/Hedo -> Hedo/JRich/Clark -> Gortat/Carter/Pietrus, right? Or would that have screwed up the payroll? Would we have been able to keep/pay Frye? I know we wouldn't have gotten Chilly or Warrick (right?).

impulsenine wrote:Note: Please take the following with a grain of salt



So Amare... was it worth it?


Suns had a rough year. Knicks are under .500. He'd have gotten paid the same amount this year (and the next, and the next, and quite probably the following two). I can't help but wonder if he realizes he dun goofed.

As much as it pains me to say, I can't fault Amare for turning down the Suns and going with the Knicks.

Granted, he would have had a better shot at winning here, in my opinion, than in NY. However, he had to take the money with the way his knees are. I feel we offered a fair and reasonable contract, if our medical staff believes he will break down in a couple years, I'm inclined to agree with their decision-making process.

If someone offers you guaranteed money would you turn it down? Lets take a moment to look at it in Amare's view. U just had 2 almost career ending diagnosis would you take a risk and signing a contract with money guaranteed or not?

Amare did what was best for his future much like what sarver did. Why is Amare the bad guy here? This situation there are no bad guys. Amare has the right to decide for himself what he needs to do and not get vilified for it. He has earned that right. Sarver is managing his money that he earned and its his right to make a decision what to do with it.

This question should be given to both the suns owner AND amare not just amare.

The guy needed the money, he was digging in between couch cushions trying to find any change. He was so broke, whenever he would go to five star restaurants or bars, he wouldn't even tip the server. The servers were of course fine with this because they knew he needed the money more than they did.

Qwigglez wrote:.... he wouldn't even tip the server....

Its an Amare thing

He was a jackass.

I really dont know how all this would have played out, but hindsight would have me sign him when he offered up a contract in April I believe for around 14-15 mil... they balked on the length... but he would have been a huge trading chip now if they had no intentions of keeping him for 5 yrs. Sign him for 5 and deal him in 2.... the best of both worlds.

We likely would have signed Frye...extended Duds...traded Barbososo/Hedu/JRich... wouldnt have signed Chil or warrick... lou ? who cares.... Brooks yes...

I cant see how we'd be worse.

Nash/Brooks
Carter/ Pietrus
Hill /Dudley
Amare /Frye
Gortat / Lopez


ouch... lock this thread.... it can only continue remorsefully.

Frank Lee wrote:Nash/Brooks
Carter/ Pietrus
Hill /Dudley
Amare /Frye
Gortat / Lopez


ouch... lock this thread.... it can only continue remorsefully.

That's what I'm saying... how much would you give up to be on a contender?

Get rid of Carter, add a good-to-very good SG and you have something pretty special there.

Or just have a ridiculous Gortat/Amare/Frye/Hill/Nash lineup

I would have definitely signed him. Even if we guaranteed all five years instead of three, we'd face one year of money hell if he got hurt and the last year we could deal him as an expiring.

I don't care man, you just can't get rid of someone as good as he is. Bottom line.

if he stayed, we'd look like this...

Nash-Brooks
JRich-Dudley
Hill-Peaches
Amare-Warrick
Frye-Gortat


We wouldn't have had the money for JChill's contract (which we used Amares trade exception for).
We would've eventually traded Hedo after realizing he doesn't fit in Phoenix alongside Nash.
So there it is

sunsfan3 wrote:if he stayed, we'd look like this...

Nash-Brooks
JRich?-Dudley
Hill-Peaches
Amare-Warrick
Frye-Gortat


We wouldn't have had the money for JChill's contract (which we used Amares trade exception for).
We would've eventually traded Hedo after realizing he doesn't fit in Phoenix alongside Nash.
So there it is

ahem.... I think you were dreaming of those peaceful copacetic Carter-less days. That deal would have been the same. Orlando wanted to de-Vincify

sunsfan3 wrote:if he stayed, we'd look like this...

Nash-Brooks
JRich-Dudley
Hill-Peaches
Amare-Warrick
Frye-Gortat


We wouldn't have had the money for JChill's contract (which we used Amares trade exception for).
We would've eventually traded Hedo after realizing he doesn't fit in Phoenix alongside Nash.
So there it is

We'd have played Hedo at SF, for one.

JohnVancouver wrote:

sunsfan3 wrote:if he stayed, we'd look like this...

Nash-Brooks
JRich-Dudley
Hill-Peaches
Amare-Warrick
Frye-Gortat


We wouldn't have had the money for JChill's contract (which we used Amares trade exception for).
We would've eventually traded Hedo after realizing he doesn't fit in Phoenix alongside Nash.
So there it is

We'd have played Hedo at SF, for one.

We also wouldn't have signed Warrick because we acquired him in a S&T with the Bulls with part of the trade exception we got for Amar'e.

That said, I would like to think we would have made the Orlando trade with the exception of keeping J-Rich, but I'm not sure if that would be even remotely possible or if we'd even make the trade at all considering Hedo would have obviously played a different role for Phoenix with Amar'e still here.

Frank Lee wrote:

Qwigglez wrote:.... he wouldn't even tip the server....

Its an Amare thing

He was a jackass.

I really dont know how all this would have played out, but hindsight would have me sign him when he offered up a contract in April I believe for around 14-15 mil... they balked on the length... but he would have been a huge trading chip now if they had no intentions of keeping him for 5 yrs. Sign him for 5 and deal him in 2.... the best of both worlds.

We likely would have signed Frye...extended Duds...traded Barbososo/Hedu/JRich... wouldnt have signed Chil or warrick... lou ? who cares.... Brooks yes...

I cant see how we'd be worse.

Nash/Brooks
Carter/ Pietrus
Hill /Dudley
Amare /Frye
Gortat / Lopez


ouch... lock this thread.... it can only continue remorsefully.

It was actually a little after the trade deadline I think, when he was offered $14m for 5 (3years guarantee) and he countered with $14m with all years guaranteed. We definitely screwed that up. I didn't really think about signing him and using him as a trade chip so that kinda just makes things worse. And to think we could've got a package similar to what the Nuggets got for Melo if we dealt with a star-starved NY team if we had moved Amare after.

Frye would've been resigned for sure, Lou would've been resigned because we wouldn't have money to sign Warrick and JChill anyway.

its only been 3/4 of a season in a 5 year contract.. to early to judge.

Frank Lee wrote:

Qwigglez wrote:.... he wouldn't even tip the server....

Its an Amare thing

He was a jackass.

actually... my friend used to be a waitress at Axis Radius. and she told me that Amare would never pay his bill and would just assumed it was free because of who he was.

so, it's true. he is a jackass.

I would have signed him to a max because he would have attracted CP3 or D-Will to come to PHX once Nash retired.

I miss his offense but nothing else. The man cares more about Louis Vuitton than he does playing defense.
I also think he has a huge ego and having to share the limelight with Carmelo wont work and one will eventually get traded.

I especially dont miss his mess of a family.

Can't believe people are seriously upset at him for turning down LESS money. Suns didn't match. If they did, he'd still be on the team.

Was it in the Suns' best interest to pay that much? Probably not. But you can't seriously say Amare made a poor decision when his knees could explode tomorrow and he'd still make ~$100M.

Accepting substantially less guaranteed money to remain in Phoenix would have constituted bad business on Stoudemire's part. Conversely, refusing to fully guarantee his salaries for more than three years represented fiscal prudence by the Suns. Running the risk of another Anfernee Hardaway debacle wasn't necessarily worthwhile for a club that still seemed to lack a championship formula.

Even with Stoudemire back, Phoenix probably wouldn't have been the same team without Barbosa and Amundson and given the regression of Dragic and Lopez. Last season, the Suns went 32-12 (.727, a 60-win pace) with Barbosa and 22-16 (.579, a 47-win pace) without him.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/barbole01/splits/2010/

The point is that the differences between last year's team and this year's extend so far beyond Stoudemire that pinpointing his value proves difficult. One of the greatest strengths of the 2010 club was its bench and that second-unit fundamentally changed for the worse after the departures of Barbosa and Amundson.

With Stoudemire still in tow, the Suns may have been less likely to break-up their starting lineup and consummate that Orlando trade. We'll never know for sure, but I'm glad that Phoenix could acquire Gortat: he gives the franchise its best defense-and-rebounding center since perhaps John "Hot Rod" Williams in the later 1990s and he's not bad offensively.

the_warden wrote:Can't believe people are seriously upset at him for turning down LESS money. Suns didn't match. If they did, he'd still be on the team.

Was it in the Suns' best interest to pay that much? Probably not. But you can't seriously say Amare made a poor decision when his knees could explode tomorrow and he'd still make ~$100M.

How the hell do you add a Citizen Kane applause gif here?

nicely said

Short term, it probably hurt you guys, but long term, you guys made the right move for sure. He's already showing some signs of breaking down over here.