Not sure what league rule he's referencing. Keeps moving the possibility of this back and back. I'm sure by training camp it'll be likely that it's a mid year trade so we can explore all options.
If this trade goes through -- I see it being made for two reasons 1) this year, short term, Young probably plays more valuable minutes than Smith and without Saric, the team doesn't want to waste a year of Booker, CP3, Ayton, Bridges, the Cams plus Shamet is only signed for one more year
2) with the possible extensions of Bridges and DA - this clears about 14m of cap space in 2022/23 that is on the books today. And this helps with the lux tax apron. So, it does allow the Suns a bit of flexibility next summer. Meaning they can sign a player for 5m that might keep them under the Apron.
Doing my best imitation of DavidIVPoint play - if the Suns 1st round pick conveys to OKC and the Suns move Saric & Smith now, I think they would be just over 5m under the Lux Tax Apron.
alamin330 wrote:If Thaddeus young is the best you can do for Saric and Smith I’d take my chances with Smith and Saric. He’s 32, never been on a contender, plays the same position as Crowder and Cam Jo. Spurs don’t even want him on the team. He’s not in their future plans. Why would you trade a prospect a quality role player in Saric and add a 2nd rd pick for a guy who’s gonna be bought out if no one trades for him. SMH. This move is a lateral move at best. Young is not the missing piece. Just wait for the buyout.
Next season is one of the few seasons when we really have a roster to fight for the championship, we are sure about that now and you never know how good we will be after next year.
Sadly Saric will be out for a while so he will not help us. Smith is just 21 and probably plays a few minutes per game, but you can not compare him with Thad Young.
And we can always extend or sign back Thad Young after next season if he plays great going over the cap. He would not be added for only just one season.
I am not completely sold about the trade...but after thinking a lot about it I would do it.
alamin330 wrote:If Thaddeus young is the best you can do for Saric and Smith I’d take my chances with Smith and Saric. He’s 32, never been on a contender, plays the same position as Crowder and Cam Jo. Spurs don’t even want him on the team. He’s not in their future plans. Why would you trade a prospect a quality role player in Saric and add a 2nd rd pick for a guy who’s gonna be bought out if no one trades for him. SMH. This move is a lateral move at best. Young is not the missing piece. Just wait for the buyout.
Next season is one of the few seasons when we really have a roster to fight for the championship, we are sure about that now and you never know how good we will be after next year.
Sadly Saric will be out for a while so he will not help us. Smith is just 21 and probably plays a few minutes per game, but you can not compare him with Thad Young.
And we can always extend or sign back Thad Young after next season if he plays great going over the cap. He would not be added for only just one season.
I am not completely sold about the trade...but after thinking a lot about it I would do it.
Chris Paul is not getting younger. So, though the Suns have a very good core group - well if DA and Mikal are extended, Paul is still a big part of the team. Saric getting hurt was a loss in that sense of a player adding valued minutes this year. Young will probably have more valuable minutes than Smith
Like you said, the Suns may not want to waste this year hoping Smith provides valuable minutes
I don't like giving up on Smith so soon, plus when you add in the Shamet trade and not the pick to the OKC, that will be three years without a FRP contributing the roster on cheap contracts. That being said each deal in and of itself, I can see the merits.
How many minutes will Thad play? Will he play over Crowder and/or Johnson? I don’t mind letting go of Smith and Saric but not with a pick. That’s where I hang up. Unless it’s a 2nd rd pick in 2028 or later if that’s possible then I would consider that. The again my main question is what happens with him Cam and Crowder? Also Thad is too small to play center. Unless Monty has small ball ideas with Thad as the 5 off the bench in a Saric role I’m all for it. Also giving up on Smith so soon for Thad is kinda scary.
alamin330 wrote:How many minutes will Thad play? Will he play over Crowder and/or Johnson? I don’t mind letting go of Smith and Saric but not with a pick. That’s where I hang up. Unless it’s a 2nd rd pick in 2028 or later if that’s possible then I would consider that. The again my main question is what happens with him Cam and Crowder? Also Thad is too small to play center. Unless Monty has small ball ideas with Thad as the 5 off the bench in a Saric role I’m all for it. Also giving up on Smith so soon for Thad is kinda scary.
Too lazy to work out the minutes, but he will play over Crowder/Cam/McGee this year. Or basically the injured Saric's minutes, Damian Jones minutes, Franks minutes, Naders PF minutes, Craigs minutes, and cold-shooting-night Crowder minutes from last year. 20ish all in all - probably good for a ballark figure... All positives in my eyes. I'm fine with this, especially with any injuries that will happen eventually. One of our bigs go down and it's back to Frank playing heavy minutes. Also, if we have a reliable bench, starters can play a bit less, can remain fresher, can play with more tempo / speed / agression on D / confidence, etc... So you do this trade and not waste 1 year of your 2 year window with CP.
alamin330 wrote:How many minutes will Thad play? Will he play over Crowder and/or Johnson? I don’t mind letting go of Smith and Saric but not with a pick. That’s where I hang up. Unless it’s a 2nd rd pick in 2028 or later if that’s possible then I would consider that. The again my main question is what happens with him Cam and Crowder? Also Thad is too small to play center. Unless Monty has small ball ideas with Thad as the 5 off the bench in a Saric role I’m all for it. Also giving up on Smith so soon for Thad is kinda scary.
Too lazy to work out the minutes, but he will play over Crowder/Cam/McGee this year. Or basically the injured Saric's minutes, Damian Jones minutes, Franks minutes, Naders PF minutes, Craigs minutes, and cold-shooting-night Crowder minutes from last year. 20ish all in all - probably good for a ballark figure... All positives in my eyes. I'm fine with this, especially with any injuries that will happen eventually. One of our bigs go down and it's back to Frank playing heavy minutes. Also, if we have a reliable bench, starters can play a bit less, can remain fresher, can play with more tempo / speed / agression on D / confidence, etc... So you do this trade and not waste 1 year of your 2 year window with CP.
Yeah, I'd imagine if we're targeting Young (big if here) that we'd simply want him to replace Saric's minutes. He passes the ball very well, plays a connecting role, can't shoot the three as well, but is more athletic and nimble (granted, everyone on this board is more athletic and nimble than Saric). I see the role of McGee being a bit over estimated here. I doubt he'll be a rotational piece that plays a set amount of minutes every night. More so I see him playing a very wide range of minutes on any given night based on matchup. Could get 5 one night and 15 the next based on who we're playing against. Young would play every night just like Saric.
bwgood77 wrote:I think there are already some around the league that think he's worth a max, or near max, and I think he will refine/add onto areas of his game this summer....and as I've mentioned a lot, think he can be like a Paul George light type. He may simply look like a max player next summer.
Even if he didn't make strides, people would offer more next summer because the cap is going up...the relative avg salary will go up, etc.
You've used the PG comparison a few times, and I just don't get it. Paul George is huge, has handles, a great 1-on-1 game, hits contested threes, whereas Bridges' offensive game more closely resembles Leandro Barbosa's in the halfcourt without the hard drives to the basket. And if you're going to bring up Paul George, I can't help but be reminded that at the end of that Clippers series, we subbed Torrey Craig in for Mikal to guard him. Torrey's size bothered PG more than Mikal's length. Mikal has been great on Doncic, I know, and that's definitely something to consider going forward as we're likely to have to go through that Dallas team in the playoffs as the years progress.
I look at OG Anunoby and see a kid with a much higher ceiling. He's just not the ironman Mikal is. IMO, his ability to play every single game is a lot of what you're paying for with Mikal.
I guess my issue is that I don't see him as a third star, but rather as a glue guy/role player. Whether that's because of the role we ask him to play or the role he's capable of playing I suppose is the open question. Next year should by any measure be considered Mikal in his prime, and if he's posting numbers similar to what he posted last year, paying him more than $20 mil per will seem crazy to me.
I just can't help but wonder if we can get 90% of what Bridges gives us with just a 3&D role player at $10 mil per, which is why I can definitely see the wisdom in pushing Mikal's extension talks into next offseason. See if he can give us something more this season in terms of statistical production to merit the big contract. I do see Mikal as the kind of player who might take that as a slight, and I'm not interested in disrupting team chemistry in a year we're competing for a championship. But if he's really a $25 mil per guy, shouldn't he be able to give us more than 13p, 4r, 2a, 1s and 1b? I just can't wrap my head around it.
alamin330 wrote:How many minutes will Thad play? Will he play over Crowder and/or Johnson? I don’t mind letting go of Smith and Saric but not with a pick. That’s where I hang up. Unless it’s a 2nd rd pick in 2028 or later if that’s possible then I would consider that. The again my main question is what happens with him Cam and Crowder? Also Thad is too small to play center. Unless Monty has small ball ideas with Thad as the 5 off the bench in a Saric role I’m all for it. Also giving up on Smith so soon for Thad is kinda scary.
Too lazy to work out the minutes, but he will play over Crowder/Cam/McGee this year. Or basically the injured Saric's minutes, Damian Jones minutes, Franks minutes, Naders PF minutes, Craigs minutes, and cold-shooting-night Crowder minutes from last year. 20ish all in all - probably good for a ballark figure... All positives in my eyes. I'm fine with this, especially with any injuries that will happen eventually. One of our bigs go down and it's back to Frank playing heavy minutes. Also, if we have a reliable bench, starters can play a bit less, can remain fresher, can play with more tempo / speed / agression on D / confidence, etc... So you do this trade and not waste 1 year of your 2 year window with CP.
Yeah, I'd imagine if we're targeting Young (big if here) that we'd simply want him to replace Saric's minutes. He passes the ball very well, plays a connecting role, can't shoot the three as well, but is more athletic and nimble (granted, everyone on this board is more athletic and nimble than Saric). I see the role of McGee being a bit over estimated here. I doubt he'll be a rotational piece that plays a set amount of minutes every night. More so I see him playing a very wide range of minutes on any given night based on matchup. Could get 5 one night and 15 the next based on who we're playing against. Young would play every night just like Saric.
And going to say it again, Sarver gains 15m of cap space against the luxury tax and apron. I am not sure how much that is worth as a first time lux tax payer but I think its at worst, dollar for dollar. So thats close to 30m.
alamin330 wrote:If Thaddeus young is the best you can do for Saric and Smith I’d take my chances with Smith and Saric. He’s 32, never been on a contender, plays the same position as Crowder and Cam Jo. Spurs don’t even want him on the team. He’s not in their future plans. Why would you trade a prospect a quality role player in Saric and add a 2nd rd pick for a guy who’s gonna be bought out if no one trades for him. SMH. This move is a lateral move at best. Young is not the missing piece. Just wait for the buyout.
Agree. We don't need Young but we do need young players on this team with us paying a ton out over the next few seasons. Young doesn't move the needle for me and I'd rather keep Smith and see how he does.
alamin330 wrote:How many minutes will Thad play? Will he play over Crowder and/or Johnson? I don’t mind letting go of Smith and Saric but not with a pick. That’s where I hang up. Unless it’s a 2nd rd pick in 2028 or later if that’s possible then I would consider that. The again my main question is what happens with him Cam and Crowder? Also Thad is too small to play center. Unless Monty has small ball ideas with Thad as the 5 off the bench in a Saric role I’m all for it. Also giving up on Smith so soon for Thad is kinda scary.
Thad will always find the way to play a good amount of minutes, he has always played a big role on any team since his rookie season. I wouldn't be bothered at all.
He is versatile so you can put him at any position where needed. He is switchable on defense, he can basically guard 1-5.
bwgood77 wrote:I think there are already some around the league that think he's worth a max, or near max, and I think he will refine/add onto areas of his game this summer....and as I've mentioned a lot, think he can be like a Paul George light type. He may simply look like a max player next summer.
Even if he didn't make strides, people would offer more next summer because the cap is going up...the relative avg salary will go up, etc.
You've used the PG comparison a few times, and I just don't get it. Paul George is huge, has handles, a great 1-on-1 game, hits contested threes, whereas Bridges' offensive game more closely resembles Leandro Barbosa's in the halfcourt without the hard drives to the basket. And if you're going to bring up Paul George, I can't help but be reminded that at the end of that Clippers series, we subbed Torrey Craig in for Mikal to guard him. Torrey's size bothered PG more than Mikal's length. Mikal has been great on Doncic, I know, and that's definitely something to consider going forward as we're likely to have to go through that Dallas team in the playoffs as the years progress.
I look at OG Anunoby and see a kid with a much higher ceiling. He's just not the ironman Mikal is. IMO, his ability to play every single game is a lot of what you're paying for with Mikal.
I guess my issue is that I don't see him as a third star, but rather as a glue guy/role player. Whether that's because of the role we ask him to play or the role he's capable of playing I suppose is the open question. Next year should by any measure be considered Mikal in his prime, and if he's posting numbers similar to what he posted last year, paying him more than $20 mil per will seem crazy to me.
I just can't help but wonder if we can get 90% of what Bridges gives us with just a 3&D role player at $10 mil per, which is why I can definitely see the wisdom in pushing Mikal's extension talks into next offseason. See if he can give us something more this season in terms of statistical production to merit the big contract. I do see Mikal as the kind of player who might take that as a slight, and I'm not interested in disrupting team chemistry in a year we're competing for a championship. But if he's really a $25 mil per guy, shouldn't he be able to give us more than 13p, 4r, 2a, 1s and 1b? I just can't wrap my head around it.
Yeah, we just see it differently. I see great skills with Mikal, like the prototype player you want in the NBA today, other than a league guy. Overall, I think he is better at his position than Ayton, He is a better scorer, at least as good as a defender overall (Ayton can be better 1 on 1 at times, but when it comes to help, team, and always being engaged, he's not where Mikal is. Mikal is an elite finisher (one of the best in NBA) and elite 3 pt shooter (one of best in NBA) and one of best defenders at his position in NBA....I mean in all defense he was behind star player wings.
He could absolutely score in the upper teens if he was the 3rd option or higher if a 1st or 2nd.
George was a #1 option in his 3rd year scoring 16.7 per 36 and Bridges is a 4th option scoring 14.9 per 36. Now George was also a primary ball handler so got more assists. But again, I said Paul George light.
Bridges was also FAR more efficient...we are talking near 67% TS% compared to 53% for George (which is bad..like below avg..his off rtg was not good).
Kawhi might be a better comparison as a 3rd year player if you are so worried about scoring when he was the 3rd option behind Duncan and Parker and scored 12.8 per game on not as good as efficiency.
But aside from all that, I am not as much a raw stats, PPG guy as the average guy and use the eye test and the more advanced #s to see impact.
When we inserted him as a starter last year, it turned our season around...our net rtg with him in that lineup skyrocketed.
I think we'd feel it big time if we lost it and if we tried to pay a guy who may look a little better in spot minutes on defense sometimes who doesn't shoot the 3 or have nearly the all around game Mikal does, at half the price, we'd feel it big time. There is a fine line between being a top 5 team in the west and a team on the fringes of the playoffs....and particularly post Paul if we just have, say, the Cams, Booker, Ayton and a guy like Craig, we are very likely going to have a hard time making the playoffs in the west. You always mention you even want another wing, which makes it odd you would care about a few million for Mikal.
Also not sure why you don't think Bridges has handles. Maybe not elite ones, but he has handles. He's also a great passer...you see it quite often...but when he has played a bigger role at times he has had some big assist games.
Also not sure who you think you could get that would cost $10 million and give you 90%. If a guy gives you 90% he will cost 90% or close to it. Maybe OG is close to 90% but he is $18 million, and got that with a lower cap in place so as a relative % of the cap it wouldn't be much different.
Not sure who else you would have in mind. There is a reason teams were letting a guy like Craig go for nothing or cheap and Mikal is rumored to make a lot.
lilfishi22 wrote: As I mentioned in my reply to Slim, you're risking a lot for the tiny risk that someone might clear enough space to throw Bridges a max offer. You don't know if the guy you pick up in the top 5 will even end up being as good a player as Bridges. We don't know what Cam is worth when it comes time for his deal to be extended and I think you're assuming a lot of things like hurt feelings and chemistry issues to justify a pretty significant trade. If anything, I think there would be more of a risk of chemistry issues if you traded away a great team guy in Mikal who by all accounts is great friends with Cam, for a top 5 guy who likely has an ego. I think you're jumping the gun with a move like this.
As I mentioned in my reply to Slim, you're risking a lot for the tiny risk that someone might clear enough space to throw Bridges a max offer.
Well, The Pistons, Spurs and Magic are all projected to have significant cap space in 2022 free agency. And Bridges would definitely be a big name in an underwhelming free agency that summer too. But I'd argue the bigger legitimate concern would be in what his projected market value might come in at? Anything over 20+ million would significantly hamstring us going into Johnson's and Smith's extensions as well in 2023. And IF we don't pay him what he and his agent feel he's worth, and he feels disrespected by chance, Then he may just take the qualifying offer, and in 2023:
https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cap/2022/ There are- Detroit, OKC, New York, Charlotte, Houston, San Antonio, Memphis all with max cap space. I realize that yes, These are hypothetical situations. And hopefully everything plays out best case scenario. But there'll definitely be interested teams willing to offer him in the max/ near max range.
You don't know if the guy you pick up in the top 5 will even end up being as good a player as Bridges. Definitely a fair perspective! However, it seems that the players that I specifically mentioned have excelled in their debuts and have really good projections from many of the nba experts on the draft. Is there an attached risk, of course. But there upside/ contractual obligation being lower than Mikals projected 20+ million make it much more palatable if the skillset and positional fit is optimal.
We don't know what Cam is worth when it comes time for his deal to be extended and I think you're assuming a lot of things like hurt feelings and chemistry issues to justify a pretty significant trade.
If Cam has another good showing throughout the season as what he showed in the playoffs and given his versatility and knockdown floor spacing ability for a 6'9 player, Do you think it's unreasonable/ unrealistic that his market value would be that far off from Mikals? Especially if you compare their overall stats?
If anything, I think there would be more of a risk of chemistry issues if you traded away a great team guy in Mikal who by all accounts is great friends with Cam, for a top 5 guy who likely has an ego. I think you're jumping the gun with a move like this.
Again, I like Mikal and wouldn't prefer to trade him UNLESS we anticipated/ expected him to get an offer/ command an amount bigger than what we deem reasonable to pay? Now I do hope that we can resign him, Just not at 20 million or more. And Especially not at an absurd 25+ million. IF the expected or (communicated) amount is in that range, Then I'd absolutely look to trade him for that type of package as it would allow us to resign Johnson at a slightly lesser amount, And still maintain flexibility to fill out the roster. Also, Cam may be good friends with Mikal currently. But it wouldn't be the first time that money or contractual disparity among similar positional players have caused locker room issues or potential trade requests. A good example is Shawn Marion feeling slighted by not getting a comparable extension offer to Amare. And I'm sure there are other examples as well. The premise of the trade would've been a two for one- the 7th and 14th pick or something along those lines for Mikal ( under the premise that we expect to lose him anyways). So I'd see it as good constellation value in that circumstance. But to your point, Not all lottery picks have ego issues. But for the few that do, that's why predraft interviews/ player profiles are important! But also in a two for one, Our odds of finding a comparable talent/ projected contributor are greatly increased. And yes, legitimate concerns aside, I absolutely will admit that I quite likely could be jumping the gun!
FWIW, I do hope that they prove me wrong. And that we can keep our core together.
I'm sorry but at this point, you're seriously exaggerating the risks.
1. Just a reminder the the original suggestion Slim brought up was to try and move Bridges for the highest pick so the risk we're weighing here is waiting an extra year to see what the market might pay him, potentially piss him off and the implications of luxury tax vs trading him for the highest pick to avoid giving him a max deal and go through crapshoot of the lottery, again. We took a massive gamble trading away two first round picks for Bridges and by all measures he's exceeded expectations, ie we are rare winners in the crapshoot that is the draft. The other "risk" we're trying to mitigate by making this massive move is the small risk a NY, Detroit or some other team would put together a massive offer for Bridges forcing us to match...but the thing is, he'll be a very moveable asset even if we matched. He fits with every team, every contender could use a guy like him and moving him won't be a major issue.
2. Bridges isn't Marion. Marion had been discontent for years and has always wanted the bigger spotlight. Bridges by all accounts is the ultimate team guy, he loves his team mates and hasn't shown any primadonna tendencies or personality Marion did. You can't just pick an example out of the air and say, hey it *could* apply here. ANYTHING *could* happen but unless we see reports or rumors or anything to indicate it's a potential problem, I'm not putting any stock in this.
3. IF we're talking potential chemistry issues, there is an order of magnitude more risk of that being an issue by bringing in a college kid in the top 5 of the lottery who has no experience playing with our guys, no experience winning at the NBA level, hasn't been through in the trenches with the guys and is trying to prove himself at this level. Bridges is the exact opposite, he's been with Ayton and Book since his 1st NBA game, he's been on a team that's won 20 odd games, he's been that 3rd/4th option and imo, the future is going to get brighter in Phoenix if he can become a better offensive player because then he could potentially be a borderline #2 option if he becomes a PG lite. If LT is an issue, you move other guys like CP3, Crowder, Saric, Smith whoever else when the time comes; you do whatever you need to do but move a young, core player.
4. Every team that's drafted well has gone through have had to make these decisions. It's a good problem to have, especially when you're winning. It's just the natural path you take unless you trade away those guys about to be eligible for a rookie extension for a certified top player now. You certainly don't do it for a pick, especially when our aspirations are an NBA Championship in the next few seasons.
5. Just to reiterate the point about the crapshoot of the draft, you can do all the interviews and all the scouting and you're still more likely than not to pick a Josh Jackson, Marvin Bagley or Kris Dunn than you are to pick a Mikal Bridges. I think it's absolutely crazy to trade a certified elite 3&D player that we drafted for another stab in the dark....like I just don't understand what for. If we win the draft again and that player becomes a max level player, then what? We do the same thing lol?
Really fair assessments on all points! And whilst I do somewhat disagree on certain perspectives, I really do hope that you're right and that everything plays out optimally. To your points:
Point 1 I apologize if I may have been confused as to the original proposal. I honestly could have sworn it was supposedly Bridges for Jalen Suggs ( the 5th overall pick) so that Suggs could/ would address the need for Paul's eventual replacement due to his elite leadership, poise, versatility and winning pedigree ( Gonzaga). And whilst I can somewhat agree that the draft can be a crapshoot, I believe that the overall risk is mitigated by the amount of research, predraft interviews ( to gauge personality traits/ underlying concerns), players' profile, production and analytical extrapolations towards their projected outcomes. Also strong consideration to their projected positional/ contributory fit to their specific team and scheme. Hence why you consistently hear about certain franchises that always do well in terms of drafting/ scouting- Toronto, San Antonio, Denver, OKC, etc.
Also, I understand that we'll use our ability to match as a direct deterrent towards other teams making substantial ( potential max offers), However I still believe that Bridges will be a hot commodity in an otherwise underwhelming 2022 free agency. Couple that with the fact that as you yourself stated, He's a perfect fit for most teams, And any contenders could use him, along with his consensus high potential upside/ outcome and also the escalating cap line in the coming seasons make submitting such an offer more palatable. Especially for smaller market franchises that otherwise might not be able to attract such players. For those teams, they may have little other recourse than to fully pursue such risks?
Point 2 You're absolutely right that they're different players in some ways. However, in terms of skillset, defensive versatility, elite projected upside and style of play ( disruptive defensively and in passing lanes) with lockdown defensive potential. And both were/ are viewed by consensus to be potentially elite wings on a top contending team that were expected/ anticipating big paydays for their elite abilities and versatile skillset ( Parallels evident). Now Bridges currently does seem much more down to earth and humble. And he is a great teammate without a doubt. And I agree CURRENTLY Bridges hasn't YET shown any primadonna tendencies ( Thank goodness)! However, As time has repeatedly shown, Money, fame, luxury lifestyle can absolutely change a person. Especially when you have multitudes of people in your ear influencing you. Fans, nba pundits, fellow players, NBA AGENTS, news reports all telling you and propegating the projection that you'll be a star! Or are considered to soon be one. Such influences can/ have proven to be corruptive to a person's nature. And dan absolutely foster a diva mentality and a sense of entitlement. Only time will truly tell how strong Bridges resolve is to the situations which he'll certainly face going forward. But the premise of the comparison being fairly comparable nevertheless. So I wouldn't deem it an " out of the air example considering those similarities and situational parallels honestly. I do agree though that until we actually see examples of these concerns, We ( I particularly) should temper concerns/ anxieties more.
Point 3 I completely agree here. Experience/ chemistry is key for a young team just recently removed from finals contention. A young player lacking nba experience and continuity to the team would affect a variety of things. So the value premise of the proposal would again be based upon getting something for him as opposed to straight out losing him financially without reasonable compensation.But then I also agree that we'll have solid options in moving lesser prioritized players such as Saric, Crowder, etc. To help create additional cap space if necessary. And I think that the suns front office's underlying motivation in pursuit of Thaddeus Young's expiring contract is a direct example of this premise. Again, I hope that it plays out that way too.
Point 4 Again, I agree here that all teams do have tough decisions to make when you draft well. Which is why i stated in my premise that I'd prefer to only do the trade IF we absolutely anticipated/ expected that we would lose Bridges! And I hope that we don't as to your point, our current window for contention is small ( next couple of seasons)?? So having him with his experience/ contribution/ chemistry would be optimal in comparison to an inexperienced rookie.
Point 5 I have to disagree on this as it being a matter of opinion/ perspective. I personally feel that you can greatly improve your odds of success by the amount of research/ due diligence, etc that you choose to put into your target prospects. Another thing that is seldom ever taking into legitimate consideration is environmental/ situational factors. You often see many teams just draft based on upside/ athleticism/ potential. But I feel that it's just as important ( if not more so) to take into account how your targeted prospect would contribute/ fit in the context of your team scheme/ dynamic within their specific skillset and elite abilities. Jones has done a pretty good job of identifying these oft overlooked attributes (High IQ, elite individual skillset, experience, work ethic, pedigree) much to our benefit obviously. So I can't fully agree that it's such a blatant crapshoot in its entirety. Again my preference would be to not lose him if at all possible. And alm things being currently hypothetical, The premise is based upon the worst case scenario situation. But should that unfortunately happen, Then the idea would again be in that the incoming rookie scale contract would obviously be cost controlled giving us 4 yrs to work around potential cap complications. So I'm not sure it could really be considered a " rinse and repeat " scenario for us. But ideally none of these concerns come to pass. And we are able to keep our core together regardless of any unforeseen factors.
Ghost of Kleine wrote:FLEX From Jersey (@FlexFromJersey) Tweeted: James Jones is good at negotiating trades. He will wait as long as needed until he gets the deal he wants. He sat on the CP3 deal for months until it was the deal he wanted. This deal should be no different, Suns won't bid against themselves. I trust James Jones & Company! https://t.co/j9Xgjl5EKB
For the love of all things holy, can we pretty please with sugar on the top NOT quote this lying, fake, wannabe, annoying weirdo dude as if he were any different from any of us here? In fact, can we just stop quoting him at all? He has no info, he writes and sounds weird, and is absolutely bad all round. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
Well it seems like a lot of people are buying into it. It's the kind of deal that makes some sense if SA can get value for an expiring when they don't figure to compete and may just go for a draft pick and development, so I could see it happening. I still don't see Jones, Bukstein, Monty talking to people about this. Or Saric/Jalen agents. I don't think he's getting anything from other teams and their players or agents either. The CP3 stuff made sense because he was looking for a house.
But if it happens, Flex will continue to gain traction and if not, he will say it was close but just didn't come to fruition...they couldn't agree on specifics or something...learning from Gambo. Of course both from Jersey....#4 is fitting... https://www.movoto.com/guide/nj/new-jersey-stereotypes/
Locked On Suns Podcast (@LockedOnPHXSuns) Tweeted: Camp is less than 2 weeks away and Locked On Suns is heating up!
☀️ Gordon extension sets market for versatile defense ☀️ What it means for Mikal Bridges + 2022 free agency ☀️ Is a healthy Denver the biggest threat out West?
Ghost of Kleine wrote:FLEX From Jersey (@FlexFromJersey) Tweeted: James Jones is good at negotiating trades. He will wait as long as needed until he gets the deal he wants. He sat on the CP3 deal for months until it was the deal he wanted. This deal should be no different, Suns won't bid against themselves. I trust James Jones & Company! https://t.co/j9Xgjl5EKB
For the love of all things holy, can we pretty please with sugar on the top NOT quote this lying, fake, wannabe, annoying weirdo dude as if he were any different from any of us here? In fact, can we just stop quoting him at all? He has no info, he writes and sounds weird, and is absolutely bad all round. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
Well it seems like a lot of people are buying into it. It's the kind of deal that makes some sense if SA can get value for an expiring when they don't figure to compete and may just go for a draft pick and development, so I could see it happening. I still don't see Jones, Bukstein, Monty talking to people about this. Or Saric/Jalen agents. I don't think he's getting anything from other teams and their players or agents either. The CP3 stuff made sense because he was looking for a house.
But if it happens, he will continue to gain traction and if not, he will say it was close but just didn't come to fruition...they couldn't agree on specifics or something.
Yeah, it does make sense. That is why everyone and my grandmother has been speculating about it (this forum and others too) waaaaay before this wannabe clown started staying it as well - among with how we are getting an athletic big to back up Ayton who fits our age group - and we got a vet instead in McGee that was also rumoured/reported before Clown from Jersey made his "insider info" available to us peasants. . If he was on this forum I'd be fine with him, makes logical points, follows the team closely and seems passionate about the Suns. But with him trying to make internet fame off of blatant lies claiming he has inside info, while trying to sound all smart and purpously vauge so he won't get called out on his bs (or he can backpedal and lie sg else "was close but did not come to fruition") makes me wanna vomit. What's wrong with ppl (and the world) nowadays...
As I mentioned in my reply to Slim, you're risking a lot for the tiny risk that someone might clear enough space to throw Bridges a max offer.
Well, The Pistons, Spurs and Magic are all projected to have significant cap space in 2022 free agency. And Bridges would definitely be a big name in an underwhelming free agency that summer too. But I'd argue the bigger legitimate concern would be in what his projected market value might come in at? Anything over 20+ million would significantly hamstring us going into Johnson's and Smith's extensions as well in 2023. And IF we don't pay him what he and his agent feel he's worth, and he feels disrespected by chance, Then he may just take the qualifying offer, and in 2023:
https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cap/2022/ There are- Detroit, OKC, New York, Charlotte, Houston, San Antonio, Memphis all with max cap space. I realize that yes, These are hypothetical situations. And hopefully everything plays out best case scenario. But there'll definitely be interested teams willing to offer him in the max/ near max range.
You don't know if the guy you pick up in the top 5 will even end up being as good a player as Bridges. Definitely a fair perspective! However, it seems that the players that I specifically mentioned have excelled in their debuts and have really good projections from many of the nba experts on the draft. Is there an attached risk, of course. But there upside/ contractual obligation being lower than Mikals projected 20+ million make it much more palatable if the skillset and positional fit is optimal.
We don't know what Cam is worth when it comes time for his deal to be extended and I think you're assuming a lot of things like hurt feelings and chemistry issues to justify a pretty significant trade.
If Cam has another good showing throughout the season as what he showed in the playoffs and given his versatility and knockdown floor spacing ability for a 6'9 player, Do you think it's unreasonable/ unrealistic that his market value would be that far off from Mikals? Especially if you compare their overall stats?
If anything, I think there would be more of a risk of chemistry issues if you traded away a great team guy in Mikal who by all accounts is great friends with Cam, for a top 5 guy who likely has an ego. I think you're jumping the gun with a move like this.
Again, I like Mikal and wouldn't prefer to trade him UNLESS we anticipated/ expected him to get an offer/ command an amount bigger than what we deem reasonable to pay? Now I do hope that we can resign him, Just not at 20 million or more. And Especially not at an absurd 25+ million. IF the expected or (communicated) amount is in that range, Then I'd absolutely look to trade him for that type of package as it would allow us to resign Johnson at a slightly lesser amount, And still maintain flexibility to fill out the roster. Also, Cam may be good friends with Mikal currently. But it wouldn't be the first time that money or contractual disparity among similar positional players have caused locker room issues or potential trade requests. A good example is Shawn Marion feeling slighted by not getting a comparable extension offer to Amare. And I'm sure there are other examples as well. The premise of the trade would've been a two for one- the 7th and 14th pick or something along those lines for Mikal ( under the premise that we expect to lose him anyways). So I'd see it as good constellation value in that circumstance. But to your point, Not all lottery picks have ego issues. But for the few that do, that's why predraft interviews/ player profiles are important! But also in a two for one, Our odds of finding a comparable talent/ projected contributor are greatly increased. And yes, legitimate concerns aside, I absolutely will admit that I quite likely could be jumping the gun!
FWIW, I do hope that they prove me wrong. And that we can keep our core together.
I'm sorry but at this point, you're seriously exaggerating the risks.
1. Just a reminder the the original suggestion Slim brought up was to try and move Bridges for the highest pick so the risk we're weighing here is waiting an extra year to see what the market might pay him, potentially piss him off and the implications of luxury tax vs trading him for the highest pick to avoid giving him a max deal and go through crapshoot of the lottery, again. We took a massive gamble trading away two first round picks for Bridges and by all measures he's exceeded expectations, ie we are rare winners in the crapshoot that is the draft. The other "risk" we're trying to mitigate by making this massive move is the small risk a NY, Detroit or some other team would put together a massive offer for Bridges forcing us to match...but the thing is, he'll be a very moveable asset even if we matched. He fits with every team, every contender could use a guy like him and moving him won't be a major issue.
2. Bridges isn't Marion. Marion had been discontent for years and has always wanted the bigger spotlight. Bridges by all accounts is the ultimate team guy, he loves his team mates and hasn't shown any primadonna tendencies or personality Marion did. You can't just pick an example out of the air and say, hey it *could* apply here. ANYTHING *could* happen but unless we see reports or rumors or anything to indicate it's a potential problem, I'm not putting any stock in this.
3. IF we're talking potential chemistry issues, there is an order of magnitude more risk of that being an issue by bringing in a college kid in the top 5 of the lottery who has no experience playing with our guys, no experience winning at the NBA level, hasn't been through in the trenches with the guys and is trying to prove himself at this level. Bridges is the exact opposite, he's been with Ayton and Book since his 1st NBA game, he's been on a team that's won 20 odd games, he's been that 3rd/4th option and imo, the future is going to get brighter in Phoenix if he can become a better offensive player because then he could potentially be a borderline #2 option if he becomes a PG lite. If LT is an issue, you move other guys like CP3, Crowder, Saric, Smith whoever else when the time comes; you do whatever you need to do but move a young, core player.
4. Every team that's drafted well has gone through have had to make these decisions. It's a good problem to have, especially when you're winning. It's just the natural path you take unless you trade away those guys about to be eligible for a rookie extension for a certified top player now. You certainly don't do it for a pick, especially when our aspirations are an NBA Championship in the next few seasons.
5. Just to reiterate the point about the crapshoot of the draft, you can do all the interviews and all the scouting and you're still more likely than not to pick a Josh Jackson, Marvin Bagley or Kris Dunn than you are to pick a Mikal Bridges. I think it's absolutely crazy to trade a certified elite 3&D player that we drafted for another stab in the dark....like I just don't understand what for. If we win the draft again and that player becomes a max level player, then what? We do the same thing lol?
Really fair assessments on all points! And whilst I do somewhat disagree on certain perspectives, I really do hope that you're right and that everything plays out optimally. To your points:
Point 1 I apologize if I may have been confused as to the original proposal. I honestly could have sworn it was supposedly Bridges for Jalen Suggs ( the 5th overall pick) so that Suggs could/ would address the need for Paul's eventual replacement due to his elite leadership, poise, versatility and winning pedigree ( Gonzaga). And whilst I can somewhat agree that the draft can be a crapshoot, I believe that the overall risk is mitigated by the amount of research, predraft interviews ( to gauge personality traits/ underlying concerns), players' profile, production and analytical extrapolations towards their projected outcomes. Also strong consideration to their projected positional/ contributory fit to their specific team and scheme. Hence why you consistently hear about certain franchises that always do well in terms of drafting/ scouting- Toronto, San Antonio, Denver, OKC, etc.
Also, I understand that we'll use our ability to match as a direct deterrent towards other teams making substantial ( potential max offers), However I still believe that Bridges will be a hot commodity in an otherwise underwhelming 2022 free agency. Couple that with the fact that as you yourself stated, He's a perfect fit for most teams, And any contenders could use him, along with his consensus high potential upside/ outcome and also the escalating cap line in the coming seasons make submitting such an offer more palatable. Especially for smaller market franchises that otherwise might not be able to attract such players. For those teams, they may have little other recourse than to fully pursue such risks?
Point 2 You're absolutely right that they're different players in some ways. However, in terms of skillset, defensive versatility, elite projected upside and style of play ( disruptive defensively and in passing lanes) with lockdown defensive potential. And both were/ are viewed by consensus to be potentially elite wings on a top contending team that were expected/ anticipating big paydays for their elite abilities and versatile skillset ( Parallels evident). Now Bridges currently does seem much more down to earth and humble. And he is a great teammate without a doubt. And I agree CURRENTLY Bridges hasn't YET shown any primadonna tendencies ( Thank goodness)! However, As time has repeatedly shown, Money, fame, luxury lifestyle can absolutely change a person. Especially when you have multitudes of people in your ear influencing you. Fans, nba pundits, fellow players, NBA AGENTS, news reports all telling you and propegating the projection that you'll be a star! Or are considered to soon be one. Such influences can/ have proven to be corruptive to a person's nature. And dan absolutely foster a diva mentality and a sense of entitlement. Only time will truly tell how strong Bridges resolve is to the situations which he'll certainly face going forward. But the premise of the comparison being fairly comparable nevertheless. So I wouldn't deem it an " out of the air example considering those similarities and situational parallels honestly. I do agree though that until we actually see examples of these concerns, We ( I particularly) should temper concerns/ anxieties more.
Point 3 I completely agree here. Experience/ chemistry is key for a young team just recently removed from finals contention. A young player lacking nba experience and continuity to the team would affect a variety of things. So the value premise of the proposal would again be based upon getting something for him as opposed to straight out losing him financially without reasonable compensation.But then I also agree that we'll have solid options in moving lesser prioritized players such as Saric, Crowder, etc. To help create additional cap space if necessary. And I think that the suns front office's underlying motivation in pursuit of Thaddeus Young's expiring contract is a direct example of this premise. Again, I hope that it plays out that way too.
Point 4 Again, I agree here that all teams do have tough decisions to make when you draft well. Which is why i stated in my premise that I'd prefer to only do the trade IF we absolutely anticipated/ expected that we would lose Bridges! And I hope that we don't as to your point, our current window for contention is small ( next couple of seasons)?? So having him with his experience/ contribution/ chemistry would be optimal in comparison to an inexperienced rookie.
Point 5 I have to disagree on this as it being a matter of opinion/ perspective. I personally feel that you can greatly improve your odds of success by the amount of research/ due diligence, etc that you choose to put into your target prospects. Another thing that is seldom ever taking into legitimate consideration is environmental/ situational factors. You often see many teams just draft based on upside/ athleticism/ potential. But I feel that it's just as important ( if not more so) to take into account how your targeted prospect would contribute/ fit in the context of your team scheme/ dynamic within their specific skillset and elite abilities. Jones has done a pretty good job of identifying these oft overlooked attributes (High IQ, elite individual skillset, experience, work ethic, pedigree) much to our benefit obviously. So I can't fully agree that it's such a blatant crapshoot in its entirety. Again my preference would be to not lose him if at all possible. And alm things being currently hypothetical, The premise is based upon the worst case scenario situation. But should that unfortunately happen, Then the idea would again be in that the incoming rookie scale contract would obviously be cost controlled giving us 4 yrs to work around potential cap complications. So I'm not sure it could really be considered a " rinse and repeat " scenario for us. But ideally none of these concerns come to pass. And we are able to keep our core together regardless of any unforeseen factors.
I'll keep it short since we mostly agree with point 2, 3 and 4.
Regarding point 1 and 5, around the crapshootness of the draft, it's just a fact. You can do all the scouting, research and interviews you want but ultimately, you just don't know what that player will eventually become. No team does it perfectly because it's not a perfect science. Increasing scouting and research mitigates some concerns and help you narrow down your prospect but very very rarely do you get the perfect combination of the right attitude, killer focus and all the other physical and skill attributes - those are usually top 3 picks. You could still end up with guys like Andrew Wiggins who had the right attitude, the skill set but lacked that killer focus even when he was basically the consensus #1 pick. You have guys like Ben Simmons who also lacked that killer focus and possibly the right attitude as well. As for the money, fame and luxuries argument, that could literally happen to anyone, it's a risk with everyone and if mitigating that risk means getting rid of that player, who's the say the guy coming in wont have that same issue? We got a GOOD dude in Mikal. He interviewed super well pre-draft, he's a winning player and played his role on a winning college team and we haven't heard a single peep from anyone about him being a poor team mate, bad sport or whatever. If we're talking about the chance of him being a primadonna and walking down the Marion route....might as well trade Ayton too then
The draft is a gamble. It's not a complete stab in the dark like you're going to accidently pick a DeAnthony Melton in the top 5 but it is still a gamble because you're making a choice among the 5-10 guys you've done significant scouting on and more likely than not, there's one "best" pick and the rest of them will be bench rotation guys or journeymen. It is what it is. Like in civilian life, a company could hire a guy with a solid resume and interview super well but end up being dead weight. The 2018 draft where we walked away with Ayton and Bridges, we won that draft walking away with two guys who could be up for max contracts. We've won that gamble and it's not something that happens often.
I just don't see a scenario where things will break down forcing us to move him for picks. Jones has been the utmost professional when dealing with our people and we'll do right by Mikal. If he gets maxed out and we'll match it and take it from there. If there's tax issues going forward, we can deal with it then but retaining talent is the priority.
lilfishi22 wrote:More than ever....we are in the championship or bust endgame
Smith and Saric for Young is a done deal for me. Don’t care about the 1st or second rounder. We are getting off of two obligated deals and gaining the best player. This big man depth weakness is not to be trifled with. Roll the dice on Smith improving ??? Not this yr. We only have 2+ to go in this Paulish window… we are still a young team, with possibility of retaining 1-11 next yr, if Shamet and Young fit
lilfishi22 wrote:I'm sorry but at this point, you're seriously exaggerating the risks.
1. Just a reminder the the original suggestion Slim brought up was to try and move Bridges for the highest pick so the risk we're weighing here is waiting an extra year to see what the market might pay him, potentially piss him off and the implications of luxury tax vs trading him for the highest pick to avoid giving him a max deal and go through crapshoot of the lottery, again. We took a massive gamble trading away two first round picks for Bridges and by all measures he's exceeded expectations, ie we are rare winners in the crapshoot that is the draft. The other "risk" we're trying to mitigate by making this massive move is the small risk a NY, Detroit or some other team would put together a massive offer for Bridges forcing us to match...but the thing is, he'll be a very moveable asset even if we matched. He fits with every team, every contender could use a guy like him and moving him won't be a major issue.
2. Bridges isn't Marion. Marion had been discontent for years and has always wanted the bigger spotlight. Bridges by all accounts is the ultimate team guy, he loves his team mates and hasn't shown any primadonna tendencies or personality Marion did. You can't just pick an example out of the air and say, hey it *could* apply here. ANYTHING *could* happen but unless we see reports or rumors or anything to indicate it's a potential problem, I'm not putting any stock in this.
3. IF we're talking potential chemistry issues, there is an order of magnitude more risk of that being an issue by bringing in a college kid in the top 5 of the lottery who has no experience playing with our guys, no experience winning at the NBA level, hasn't been through in the trenches with the guys and is trying to prove himself at this level. Bridges is the exact opposite, he's been with Ayton and Book since his 1st NBA game, he's been on a team that's won 20 odd games, he's been that 3rd/4th option and imo, the future is going to get brighter in Phoenix if he can become a better offensive player because then he could potentially be a borderline #2 option if he becomes a PG lite. If LT is an issue, you move other guys like CP3, Crowder, Saric, Smith whoever else when the time comes; you do whatever you need to do but move a young, core player.
4. Every team that's drafted well has gone through have had to make these decisions. It's a good problem to have, especially when you're winning. It's just the natural path you take unless you trade away those guys about to be eligible for a rookie extension for a certified top player now. You certainly don't do it for a pick, especially when our aspirations are an NBA Championship in the next few seasons.
5. Just to reiterate the point about the crapshoot of the draft, you can do all the interviews and all the scouting and you're still more likely than not to pick a Josh Jackson, Marvin Bagley or Kris Dunn than you are to pick a Mikal Bridges. I think it's absolutely crazy to trade a certified elite 3&D player that we drafted for another stab in the dark....like I just don't understand what for. If we win the draft again and that player becomes a max level player, then what? We do the same thing lol?
Spoiler:
Really fair assessments on all points! And whilst I do somewhat disagree on certain perspectives, I really do hope that you're right and that everything plays out optimally. To your points:
Point 1 I apologize if I may have been confused as to the original proposal. I honestly could have sworn it was supposedly Bridges for Jalen Suggs ( the 5th overall pick) so that Suggs could/ would address the need for Paul's eventual replacement due to his elite leadership, poise, versatility and winning pedigree ( Gonzaga). And whilst I can somewhat agree that the draft can be a crapshoot, I believe that the overall risk is mitigated by the amount of research, predraft interviews ( to gauge personality traits/ underlying concerns), players' profile, production and analytical extrapolations towards their projected outcomes. Also strong consideration to their projected positional/ contributory fit to their specific team and scheme. Hence why you consistently hear about certain franchises that always do well in terms of drafting/ scouting- Toronto, San Antonio, Denver, OKC, etc.
Also, I understand that we'll use our ability to match as a direct deterrent towards other teams making substantial ( potential max offers), However I still believe that Bridges will be a hot commodity in an otherwise underwhelming 2022 free agency. Couple that with the fact that as you yourself stated, He's a perfect fit for most teams, And any contenders could use him, along with his consensus high potential upside/ outcome and also the escalating cap line in the coming seasons make submitting such an offer more palatable. Especially for smaller market franchises that otherwise might not be able to attract such players. For those teams, they may have little other recourse than to fully pursue such risks?
Point 2 You're absolutely right that they're different players in some ways. However, in terms of skillset, defensive versatility, elite projected upside and style of play ( disruptive defensively and in passing lanes) with lockdown defensive potential. And both were/ are viewed by consensus to be potentially elite wings on a top contending team that were expected/ anticipating big paydays for their elite abilities and versatile skillset ( Parallels evident). Now Bridges currently does seem much more down to earth and humble. And he is a great teammate without a doubt. And I agree CURRENTLY Bridges hasn't YET shown any primadonna tendencies ( Thank goodness)! However, As time has repeatedly shown, Money, fame, luxury lifestyle can absolutely change a person. Especially when you have multitudes of people in your ear influencing you. Fans, nba pundits, fellow players, NBA AGENTS, news reports all telling you and propegating the projection that you'll be a star! Or are considered to soon be one. Such influences can/ have proven to be corruptive to a person's nature. And dan absolutely foster a diva mentality and a sense of entitlement. Only time will truly tell how strong Bridges resolve is to the situations which he'll certainly face going forward. But the premise of the comparison being fairly comparable nevertheless. So I wouldn't deem it an " out of the air example considering those similarities and situational parallels honestly. I do agree though that until we actually see examples of these concerns, We ( I particularly) should temper concerns/ anxieties more.
Point 3 I completely agree here. Experience/ chemistry is key for a young team just recently removed from finals contention. A young player lacking nba experience and continuity to the team would affect a variety of things. So the value premise of the proposal would again be based upon getting something for him as opposed to straight out losing him financially without reasonable compensation.But then I also agree that we'll have solid options in moving lesser prioritized players such as Saric, Crowder, etc. To help create additional cap space if necessary. And I think that the suns front office's underlying motivation in pursuit of Thaddeus Young's expiring contract is a direct example of this premise. Again, I hope that it plays out that way too.
Point 4 Again, I agree here that all teams do have tough decisions to make when you draft well. Which is why i stated in my premise that I'd prefer to only do the trade IF we absolutely anticipated/ expected that we would lose Bridges! And I hope that we don't as to your point, our current window for contention is small ( next couple of seasons)?? So having him with his experience/ contribution/ chemistry would be optimal in comparison to an inexperienced rookie.
Point 5 I have to disagree on this as it being a matter of opinion/ perspective. I personally feel that you can greatly improve your odds of success by the amount of research/ due diligence, etc that you choose to put into your target prospects. Another thing that is seldom ever taking into legitimate consideration is environmental/ situational factors. You often see many teams just draft based on upside/ athleticism/ potential. But I feel that it's just as important ( if not more so) to take into account how your targeted prospect would contribute/ fit in the context of your team scheme/ dynamic within their specific skillset and elite abilities. Jones has done a pretty good job of identifying these oft overlooked attributes (High IQ, elite individual skillset, experience, work ethic, pedigree) much to our benefit obviously. So I can't fully agree that it's such a blatant crapshoot in its entirety. Again my preference would be to not lose him if at all possible. And alm things being currently hypothetical, The premise is based upon the worst case scenario situation. But should that unfortunately happen, Then the idea would again be in that the incoming rookie scale contract would obviously be cost controlled giving us 4 yrs to work around potential cap complications. So I'm not sure it could really be considered a " rinse and repeat " scenario for us. But ideally none of these concerns come to pass. And we are able to keep our core together regardless of any unforeseen factors.
I'll keep it short since we mostly agree with point 2, 3 and 4.
Regarding point 1 and 5, around the crapshootness of the draft, it's just a fact. You can do all the scouting, research and interviews you want but ultimately, you just don't know what that player will eventually become. No team does it perfectly because it's not a perfect science. Increasing scouting and research mitigates some concerns and help you narrow down your prospect but very very rarely do you get the perfect combination of the right attitude, killer focus and all the other physical and skill attributes - those are usually top 3 picks. You could still end up with guys like Andrew Wiggins who had the right attitude, the skill set but lacked that killer focus even when he was basically the consensus #1 pick. You have guys like Ben Simmons who also lacked that killer focus and possibly the right attitude as well. As for the money, fame and luxuries argument, that could literally happen to anyone, it's a risk with everyone and if mitigating that risk means getting rid of that player, who's the say the guy coming in wont have that same issue? We got a GOOD dude in Mikal. He interviewed super well pre-draft, he's a winning player and played his role on a winning college team and we haven't heard a single peep from anyone about him being a poor team mate, bad sport or whatever. If we're talking about the chance of him being a primadonna and walking down the Marion route....might as well trade Ayton too then
The draft is a gamble. It's not a complete stab in the dark like you're going to accidently pick a DeAnthony Melton in the top 5 but it is still a gamble because you're making a choice among the 5-10 guys you've done significant scouting on and more likely than not, there's one "best" pick and the rest of them will be bench rotation guys or journeymen. It is what it is. Like in civilian life, a company could hire a guy with a solid resume and interview super well but end up being dead weight. The 2018 draft where we walked away with Ayton and Bridges, we won that draft walking away with two guys who could be up for max contracts. We've won that gamble and it's not something that happens often.
I just don't see a scenario where things will break down forcing us to move him for picks. Jones has been the utmost professional when dealing with our people and we'll do right by Mikal. If he gets maxed out and we'll match it and take it from there. If there's tax issues going forward, we can deal with it then but retaining talent is the priority.
Great post! I find no faults or disagreements with anything that you've stated here. Respect!!!
