RealGM

I read this article and was going to post it myself but due to not being around all that much I wasn't sure that it had been posted. What an absolute joke he is. I wish we could rid ourselves of our owner.

Man I didn't know that Sarver has so much power. If Seth wants me to believe that these talks are being held up because Sarver wants a hard cap and to ditch the mid level exempt, he has been in the sun too long. These talks are being held up by ALL the owners, who want the BRI to be split from 57-43 players favor to 46-54 their favor. It is as simple as that. You didn't hear Wade curse out Sarver. In fact you didn't hear any player get angry at Sarver.

What we hear is second hand crap about mega rich owners that don't want to hear about Sarver's woes. Guys who are happy the system is in their favor, where they can buy chips. Sarver is aware of the rigged system run by Stern, and wants it changed. If you find out after you buy a team, that you really bought the Washington Generals, wouldn't you be pissed?

Stern is the one who needs to go, and if Sarver's crap, helps expedite that, I am all for it.

RunDogGun wrote:What we hear is second hand crap about mega rich owners that don't want to hear about Sarver's woes

yup.... There's a lot of ax grinding going on with Sarver. His past jackassery lingers around him like a fog.

He's is steadfast with his viewpoints on the way the league should operate. Others stay quiet though I am sure many have the same opinions and desires. Ever been in a meeting with 30 decision makers ? Usually one or two take the floor and a silent following nods their heads, thankful a mouthpiece for their sentiments has volunteered. Sarver has put his turkey neck on the chopping block. Thats my opinion. I'm not gobbling the spoonfed stuffing being dished out by sidelining bloggers with with empty plates.

Its easy to despise our owner, but dog-piling on with his negotiation intentions to curb the mega-payroll system that favors a select few franchises isnt exactly fair. Change nothing and we will continue to see LA/NY/? and the likes outspend everyone by 30-40 mill without blinking. The players are balking because they know, as long as salaries remain unchecked, they will be over compensated, over valued, and be allowed to create their own expensive alliances.

I know, it seems like it is better news to speculate about Sarver, while real news such as Denver's FAs signing no opt out clauses to play in China. Fans are too busy saying that no one will sign here, yet Denver has guys jumping ship to play in China, and they don't care if the lockout gets resolved. And they as a team played great down the stretch.

Wouldn't it seem more logical that they all would try for another go, with the success they had after getting rid of the Melo drama, than to to leave? And Martin says that the team made their bed. Now if Hill decided to go to China, and say that he felt the team made a poor choice not to resign him, and after that, two other FAs of ours did the same thing, I could see how Sarver is the problem. But so far, the only real guy we lost that seemed concerning was Griffen. Kerr, didn't have his heart into GMing, and Welts left to be with his partner. Amare left for the money and fame of the Big Apple, so what is the big deal? D'Antoni? He said that he decided to take his ball and leave, big whoop.

i hope he sells the team. if he does though i fear he would sell to someone who would relocate the team just to be a dick

RunDogGun wrote:I know, it seems like it is better news to speculate about Sarver, while real news such as Denver's FAs signing no opt out clauses to play in China. Fans are too busy saying that no one will sign here, yet Denver has guys jumping ship to play in China, and they don't care if the lockout gets resolved. And they as a team played great down the stretch.

Wouldn't it seem more logical that they all would try for another go, with the success they had after getting rid of the Melo drama, than to to leave? And Martin says that the team made their bed. Now if Hill decided to go to China, and say that he felt the team made a poor choice not to resign him, and after that, two other FAs of ours did the same thing, I could see how Sarver is the problem. But so far, the only real guy we lost that seemed concerning was Griffen. Kerr, didn't have his heart into GMing, and Welts left to be with his partner. Amare left for the money and fame of the Big Apple, so what is the big deal? D'Antoni? He said that he decided to take his ball and leave, big whoop.

Hypothetical: If you leave your place of employment because you hate your boss and the environment he creates, what do you tell the next employer at your job interview when they ask why you left? You don't say "I hated my IDIOT boss and got tired of his crap". You make something up, or you spin the situation into something else.

I don't take NBA executives at their word. They work in an industry where every information 'leak' is calculated and you have to wade through 5ft of murky poop water before getting to the raw truth. So when so-and-so says he left because he wanted a change of location, or to see his kids more, I assume those statements are only 1% of the truth.

I don't think people are leaving exclusively because of Robert Sarver; however I don't think it's terribly unreasonable that some fans assume a poisonous ownership/management environment is what causes tenured and new Suns personnel to leave the team, considering Sarver has been the one common denominator the entire time.

Well Sarver isn't the only constant, but he certainly is getting all of the blame. Plus he isn't the sole owner of the team, so I don't know what the fans are expecting.

I am not going to begrudge a fan for their theories that may or may not be about smoke and fire relationships, for that is what fuels my thoughts about Stern. But I can't help but think about the Sonics, and how their owner started to make some good changes, and then moved the team to OKC. Sarver hasn't been the best head owner, but he hasn't been the worst either. He has made, or followed stupid choices and decisions, but who is to tell that a different owner would have made better choices. The Suns didn't make the playoffs twice during his tenure, and both of those times, they were really only a couple games out, and missed the playoffs due to injuries to major players.

RunDogGun wrote:Well Sarver isn't the only constant, but he certainly is getting all of the blame. Plus he isn't the sole owner of the team, so I don't know what the fans are expecting.

I think bitching about Sarver is perfectly acceptable; considering he is the face of the ownership team by design. I'd also like to piggy-pack onto your post; I think bitching about David Stern is perfectly acceptable as well.

RunDogGun wrote:I am not going to begrudge a fan for their theories that may or may not be about smoke and fire relationships, for that is what fuels my thoughts about Stern. But I can't help but think about the Sonics, and how their owner started to make some good changes, and then moved the team to OKC. Sarver hasn't been the best head owner, but he hasn't been the worst either. He has made, or followed stupid choices and decisions, but who is to tell that a different owner would have made better choices. The Suns didn't make the playoffs twice during his tenure, and both of those times, they were really only a couple games out, and missed the playoffs due to injuries to major players.

In the end, this ownership team's saving grace has been Steve Nash's brilliance. Unfortunately for them, he won't last forever.

Its because our team is made up of "good guy" type players, like Nash, Hill, Gortat, etc.

We have never really had an established "problem" player type, even Amare' and Marion were usually respectful and classy for the most part besides the occasional trash-talking.

The problem with Sarver is that he is associating negativity with the Suns brand, which does have an effect on how the Suns are perceived around the league, similar to how the Cavs and Clippers are portrayed because of their respective owners.

Like was said before, Nash won't last forever, he has been a great ambassador for not only the Suns, but for the entire NBA which has definitely helped the Suns brand. Yet Sarver does not understand that he is now associating the Suns with his actions, which are a brash, loudmouth, cheapskate owner. When the only news about the Suns is associated with Sarver's actions, it can easily influence how others around the league perceive the Suns.

Man I wish that Russian billionaire would have bought the Suns instead of the freaking Nets. This team +Kirilenko and a PF like David West would own.

Nash, Brooks
Dudley, Pietrus
Hill, Childress
West, Kirilenko
Gortat, Frye

WTF has Kirilenko and West done in the last 2-3 years??? And why are you fantasy trading in an owner thread???

Probably the same reason you choose to use 3 question marks when you only need to use one.. Because it's an open forum and I can.

Speaking of AK, hardwood paroxysm had a piece yesterday about him tearing it up in Europe. I guess I never really saw him at his best because I was always shocked at how much money he got. he sounds like the player Bargs was supposed to be

JohnVancouver wrote:Speaking of AK, hardwood paroxysm had a piece yesterday about him tearing it up in Europe. I guess I never really saw him at his best because I was always shocked at how much money he got. he sounds like the player Bargs was supposed to be

Yeah I tore it up when coach allowed my to play on the Junior Varsity squad too.

Ha, now it's Jordan leading the charge from the small market teams. I guess he will get the label of worst owner. He has drafted pretty crappy, traded away his best players or let them walk for nothing.

JohnVancouver wrote:Speaking of AK, hardwood paroxysm had a piece yesterday about him tearing it up in Europe. I guess I never really saw him at his best because I was always shocked at how much money he got. he sounds like the player Bargs was supposed to be

Kirilenko has the potential to be prime Shawn Marion, in the right system. IMO his defense could be better than Marion's was too--And that's saying something.

YFZblu wrote:

JohnVancouver wrote:Speaking of AK, hardwood paroxysm had a piece yesterday about him tearing it up in Europe. I guess I never really saw him at his best because I was always shocked at how much money he got. he sounds like the player Bargs was supposed to be

Kirilenko has the potential to be prime Shawn Marion, in the right system. IMO his defense could be better than Marion's was too--And that's saying something.

Hmmmmm ...... and he's a free agent now?

JohnVancouver wrote:

YFZblu wrote:

JohnVancouver wrote:Speaking of AK, hardwood paroxysm had a piece yesterday about him tearing it up in Europe. I guess I never really saw him at his best because I was always shocked at how much money he got. he sounds like the player Bargs was supposed to be

Kirilenko has the potential to be prime Shawn Marion, in the right system. IMO his defense could be better than Marion's was too--And that's saying something.

Hmmmmm ...... and he's a free agent now?

Yeah, but the smart money is him signing with his billionaire Russian countryman mate.. Hence my initial comment on ownership.

What would you do with Kiri anyway? Start him at PF, or bring him off the bench as a backup SF/PF?

Nash/ Brooks
Dudley/ Pietrus
Hill/ Childress
Kirilenko/ Morris
Gortat/ Frye

Dowdell, Lawal, Siler

Sacked: Warrick, Lopez

Or Pietus, Warrick, Lopez for a $12m SG (can you say Rip Hamilton?)

If Childress could = Barbosa and Morris/Lawal could = Amundson then that could be a very surprising team.

And the amnesty/ stretch provision could really benefit in dealing with Hamilton's expiring deal next year if we go into rebuild.

Who knows, Rip could do a Turk and accept a buyout next year in order to get off that crappy Pistons team.

..

Man this lockout is driving me insane :p