KD to the Suns

[Ghost of Kleine]

Read on Twitter

[Ghost of Kleine]

Read on Twitter

[DirtyDez]

Read on Twitter

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1625241455601111040%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=

For the record he’s jumping off his left not right leg (injury is right knee) but the way he’s moving makes me think he’ll be 100% by the time the playoffs are here. I said last season it might be a blessing in disguise that our two best players missing a month or so during the regular season isn’t the worst thing in the world. Hope it reigns true this time.

[lilfishi22]

I'm far more comfortable making this move with Ishbia as the owner than Sarver. You need someone willing to spend in the short term to maximize this window and longer term they will need to spend to offset not having draft picks.

Before the Eeyore's reply with all the worst case scenarios, yes I realize any range of outcomes are possible. But realistically if you're willing to spend money and aren't trying to lose it's unlikely to actually be terrible. So even if **** goes bad down the road it's far more likely you're giving up late lotto picks not top 3.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

100% agree with everything you said. It's about recognising, acknowledging and reconciling the risks you take that makes a gamble a smart one. The range of possibilities because of this trade is now much more varied, the highest are higher, the lowest are lower.

I do wonder though and going back to your statement about an owner willing to spend and thereby minimising the "hurt" from not having all our picks, did we go through essentially a decade of suckage after our 2010 WCF appearance because Sarver just didn't want to spend?

[lilfishi22]

A couple of things. Sarver knew that he was a problem drawing free agents, so if Sarver was the owner, this trade might have been a bad one since he would not have been able to fill out the roster with buyout players.

Even if the Suns do not win a championship, this is a smart move from Ishbia's perspective. Stars sell tickets. I LOVE the team ball that the Suns play with Cam and Mikal, but KD and especially the combo of KD, Book, and CP3 is going to fill up the building and sell lots of merch. Also, Ishbia immediately gets NBA player cred for being willing to spend to win. That gets him more players in the future, and that might even a better bet than the draft. When KD and CP3 come off the payroll, the Suns will have the money to add another player for another big 3.

We sold Mikal high. His offensive numbers during Booker's absence proved he could score. With Book and Cp3 taking more of a prime role again, his scoring would have dropped back. If we were going to move him, it was the perfect moment.

I love Mikal. Like Book said, lets get him back in 2026.

Yes, I think given the timing of when KD was made available (that's out of our control) coincided with Mikal's 2 month stretch of being the pseudo-lead guy really raised his value at the perfect time. I don't think we sold Mikal at a high because I think he gets better but given we can't choose when KD would've been available, it's about as high value as Mikal would've gotten at anytime prior to the past week.

[lilfishi22]

Much as I don't like Monty's x's and o's with his coaching, he does have the respect of players. They enjoy playing for him. He's not a guy that someone like KD will try to take advantage of like Nash. I'm also confident Paul expressed what it is like playing for him too.
The 'fatherly figure' that Monty exudes might be one of the best things for KD too. That 'just play with no pressure and be yourself' attitude is a big deal IMO.

If the guy most NBA players respect (Booker), respects Monty, that gives Monty a ton of cred. Then when you have one of the best PG's to ever play to game to also share that same reverence for Monty, that's probably all KD needed to know. That said, KD has played under Monty before in his last year at OKC and on the Olympic team along with CP3 and Book.

There are definitely better coaches than Monty, better at X's and O's for sure, but a large part of being the head coach of a contender is gaining the respect of his elite players and reigning in egos because that effect will trickle down to the rest of the team. Monty has been great at that

[BobbieL]

I'm far more comfortable making this move with Ishbia as the owner than Sarver. You need someone willing to spend in the short term to maximize this window and longer term they will need to spend to offset not having draft picks.

Before the Eeyore's reply with all the worst case scenarios, yes I realize any range of outcomes are possible. But realistically if you're willing to spend money and aren't trying to lose it's unlikely to actually be terrible. So even if **** goes bad down the road it's far more likely you're giving up late lotto picks not top 3.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

100% agree with everything you said. It's about recognising, acknowledging and reconciling the risks you take that makes a gamble a smart one. The range of possibilities because of this trade is now much more varied, the highest are higher, the lowest are lower.

I do wonder though and going back to your statement about an owner willing to spend and thereby minimising the "hurt" from not having all our picks, did we go through essentially a decade of suckage after our 2010 WCF appearance because Sarver just didn't want to spend?

Saw it on twitter -forgot who posted a podcast with Reddick. I think I have it right, three players in NBA history have shot 1700 mid range shots in a season shooting 55%
Durant
Durant
Durant

I look forward to seeing him play. It might take a bit of time but the offense should be pretty fun to watch

[lilfishi22]

Why is this the only two options though?

Another option should be, do you want to keep running with the same group with a few minor changes to shore up some of the weaknesses such as another ball handler/bench scoring etc.

I touched on this a bit on my post here

viewtopic.php?p=104212795#p104212795

That's basically the 2nd option because adding a ball handler or a little more scoring depth doesn't make us a tier 1 contender that adding a KD would. I think last playoffs showed us we were more pretenders than contenders without that third all-star+ level player. Dallas beat us with one all-NBA level guy and one all-star level player because one of our all-star+ level player just didn't show up after G2 and we had no one else to rely on. Even Book wasn't all that in that Dallas series either with 3 sub-20pt games in that series. KD gives us a certified playoff performer that can legitimately carry a team by himself. He allows CP3, Book or DA to have no show games and still have a chance in every game because he's just that level of player.

I think the Kyrie thing is just as risky if not more. Yes it would've been awesome to have kept the Twins and 1-2 of those picks but he's also a proven head case. If we don't win it all this year, you basically have to resign him (long term) otherwise we would've given up those picks for a few months of Kyrie. Then if you resign him long term, how long until that whole Kyrie situations turns untenable again, like at every one of his stops?

So yes, the give up would've been lower for Kyrie but you also get what you pay for......the way I'm looking at it with the KD vs Kyrie debate, it's buy it nice or buy it twice.

It's amazing to me people act like that Mavs series was indicative of much. If we played that series 10 times, we probably win 7 or 8. That game 7 wasn't our team...that was a team that choked. Book started off the game taking a lot of shots and choked like against the Bucks in our elimination game. Then the whole team choked. Adding one player, even a star, would not have changed that game 7.

We got too confident after game 5, talked crap, and couldn't follow through, giving them extra motivation in the process.

It's indicative of an underlying fundamental issue we've had since the Finals series and that's not having that 3rd guy when inevitably, CP3 just isn't CP3 anymore and that will continue to become an issue as CP3 gets older. You can't rely on DA because he relies on other playmakers. So then you're relying on Book/CP3 to create 90% of the offense which works great in the regular season but we've also seen CP3 get bothered by longer defenders and that leaves us with Book to shoulder the load. The fundamental issue is that our offense relies heavily on CP3 being CP3 next to Book. We win games when both guys are on because there's a trickle down effect with their scoring/playmaking. When one is subpar, the other usually picks up the load but we also so in the playoffs when neither guys has it going and we're just offensively inept.

We called for an Eric Gordon type to come in and be that 3rd playmaker/scorer and while I thought it may have been enough last season, thinking back on it, it's a very heavy burden for him to bear. KD allows CP3 and potentially even Book to have subpar games (choke) and still pull us through high stake games in a way basically no other player in the league outside of the elites of the elites could.

So while I'm not saying it was the Dallas series that identified what was wrong, the Dallas series was just the best showcase of what we already suspected was wrong.

[lilfishi22]

I'm far more comfortable making this move with Ishbia as the owner than Sarver. You need someone willing to spend in the short term to maximize this window and longer term they will need to spend to offset not having draft picks.

Before the Eeyore's reply with all the worst case scenarios, yes I realize any range of outcomes are possible. But realistically if you're willing to spend money and aren't trying to lose it's unlikely to actually be terrible. So even if **** goes bad down the road it's far more likely you're giving up late lotto picks not top 3.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

100% agree with everything you said. It's about recognising, acknowledging and reconciling the risks you take that makes a gamble a smart one. The range of possibilities because of this trade is now much more varied, the highest are higher, the lowest are lower.

I do wonder though and going back to your statement about an owner willing to spend and thereby minimising the "hurt" from not having all our picks, did we go through essentially a decade of suckage after our 2010 WCF appearance because Sarver just didn't want to spend?

Saw it on twitter -forgot who posted a podcast with Reddick. I think I have it right, three players in NBA history have shot 1700 mid range shots in a season shooting 55%
Durant
Durant
Durant

I look forward to seeing him play. It might take a bit of time but the offense should be pretty fun to watch

I think the Midrange Mafia is kind of a cool nickname and we have some real midrange assassins (even DA is kind of an assassin for a big from midrange) but I just hope we don't spam it and actually lean more Morey-Ball.

[Paradise]

I'm far more comfortable making this move with Ishbia as the owner than Sarver. You need someone willing to spend in the short term to maximize this window and longer term they will need to spend to offset not having draft picks.

Before the Eeyore's reply with all the worst case scenarios, yes I realize any range of outcomes are possible. But realistically if you're willing to spend money and aren't trying to lose it's unlikely to actually be terrible. So even if **** goes bad down the road it's far more likely you're giving up late lotto picks not top 3.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

100% agree with everything you said. It's about recognising, acknowledging and reconciling the risks you take that makes a gamble a smart one. The range of possibilities because of this trade is now much more varied, the highest are higher, the lowest are lower.

I do wonder though and going back to your statement about an owner willing to spend and thereby minimising the "hurt" from not having all our picks, did we go through essentially a decade of suckage after our 2010 WCF appearance because Sarver just didn't want to spend?

Saw it on twitter -forgot who posted a podcast with Reddick. I think I have it right, three players in NBA history have shot 1700 mid range shots in a season shooting 55%
Durant
Durant
Durant

I look forward to seeing him play. It might take a bit of time but the offense should be pretty fun to watch

I’m pretty sure Suns fans will enjoy his new one legged three point shot in transition. He hasn’t missed one in 1 year and a half.

Watch on YouTube

[WeekapaugGroove]

I'm far more comfortable making this move with Ishbia as the owner than Sarver. You need someone willing to spend in the short term to maximize this window and longer term they will need to spend to offset not having draft picks.

Before the Eeyore's reply with all the worst case scenarios, yes I realize any range of outcomes are possible. But realistically if you're willing to spend money and aren't trying to lose it's unlikely to actually be terrible. So even if **** goes bad down the road it's far more likely you're giving up late lotto picks not top 3.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

100% agree with everything you said. It's about recognising, acknowledging and reconciling the risks you take that makes a gamble a smart one. The range of possibilities because of this trade is now much more varied, the highest are higher, the lowest are lower.

I do wonder though and going back to your statement about an owner willing to spend and thereby minimising the "hurt" from not having all our picks, did we go through essentially a decade of suckage after our 2010 WCF appearance because Sarver just didn't want to spend?

I'm just saying if you know you don't have your draft pick and no reason to tank if you spend on some vets you're unlikely to be down right terrible. You're more likely to be like say this years bulls team who are in that situation.


The decade of bad was a lot of things. Early on they probably should have rebuilt sooner instead of chasing 8 seeds. Babby/Banks was pretty incompetent (although they did sign Dragic) and then you had McD. Then hilariously when they actually tried to tank they won 48 games. Was really all down hill from there with the Knight trade as it's darkest hour.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

[sunsbg]

Always hoped Book will become a deadly three point shooter and with KD occupying the midrange in addition to CP3 and DA he should really shift his focus there now. He already had around half a season shooting at 40%+, so he's capable. TJ also had 40% 3PT shooting seasons, so against certain teams maybe he can replace Craig in the lineup if Torrey is not hitting his 3s.

[lilfishi22]

100% agree with everything you said. It's about recognising, acknowledging and reconciling the risks you take that makes a gamble a smart one. The range of possibilities because of this trade is now much more varied, the highest are higher, the lowest are lower.

I do wonder though and going back to your statement about an owner willing to spend and thereby minimising the "hurt" from not having all our picks, did we go through essentially a decade of suckage after our 2010 WCF appearance because Sarver just didn't want to spend?

Saw it on twitter -forgot who posted a podcast with Reddick. I think I have it right, three players in NBA history have shot 1700 mid range shots in a season shooting 55%
Durant
Durant
Durant

I look forward to seeing him play. It might take a bit of time but the offense should be pretty fun to watch

I’m pretty sure Suns fans will enjoy his new one legged three point shot in transition. He hasn’t missed one in 1 year and a half.

Watch on YouTube

Wasn't that that move Harden was trying to perfect lol

[lilfishi22]

I'm far more comfortable making this move with Ishbia as the owner than Sarver. You need someone willing to spend in the short term to maximize this window and longer term they will need to spend to offset not having draft picks.

Before the Eeyore's reply with all the worst case scenarios, yes I realize any range of outcomes are possible. But realistically if you're willing to spend money and aren't trying to lose it's unlikely to actually be terrible. So even if **** goes bad down the road it's far more likely you're giving up late lotto picks not top 3.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

100% agree with everything you said. It's about recognising, acknowledging and reconciling the risks you take that makes a gamble a smart one. The range of possibilities because of this trade is now much more varied, the highest are higher, the lowest are lower.

I do wonder though and going back to your statement about an owner willing to spend and thereby minimising the "hurt" from not having all our picks, did we go through essentially a decade of suckage after our 2010 WCF appearance because Sarver just didn't want to spend?

I'm just saying if you know you don't have your draft pick and no reason to tank if you spend on some vets you're unlikely to be down right terrible. You're more likely to be like say this years bulls team who are in that situation.


The decade of bad was a lot of things. Early on they probably should have rebuilt sooner instead of chasing 8 seeds. Babby/Banks was pretty incompetent (although they did sign Dragic) and then you had McD. Then hilariously when they actually tried to tank they won 48 games. Was really all down hill from there with the Knight trade as it's darkest hour.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

Gotcha

ironically, that 48 win and subsequent 39 win season got us the two better players during the McD era (Booker/TJ).

[matt131]

Read on Twitter

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1625241455601111040%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=

For the record he’s jumping off his left not right leg (injury is right knee) but the way he’s moving makes me think he’ll be 100% by the time the playoffs are here. I said last season it might be a blessing in disguise that our two best players missing a month or so during the regular season isn’t the worst thing in the world. Hope it reigns true this time.

Most right handed shooters jump off their left leg on layups/dunks, so not a big deal. He looks to intentionally land on his right leg after the first dunk here, so he seems fine for the most part.

[bwgood77]

I'm far more comfortable making this move with Ishbia as the owner than Sarver. You need someone willing to spend in the short term to maximize this window and longer term they will need to spend to offset not having draft picks.

Before the Eeyore's reply with all the worst case scenarios, yes I realize any range of outcomes are possible. But realistically if you're willing to spend money and aren't trying to lose it's unlikely to actually be terrible. So even if **** goes bad down the road it's far more likely you're giving up late lotto picks not top 3.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

100% agree with everything you said. It's about recognising, acknowledging and reconciling the risks you take that makes a gamble a smart one. The range of possibilities because of this trade is now much more varied, the highest are higher, the lowest are lower.

I do wonder though and going back to your statement about an owner willing to spend and thereby minimising the "hurt" from not having all our picks, did we go through essentially a decade of suckage after our 2010 WCF appearance because Sarver just didn't want to spend?

No, he was willing to spend, but he just spent it on the wrong players. That is probably a scenario that could happen when the top tier FAs typically stay put, so you go ahead and spend your cap space on the next best available.

Now you can say he is willing to go into the tax, but that doesn't really matter if you have cap space. You can't just go from having cap space to being in the tax. You go into the tax because you are re-signing your own players or trading them for other players, though that doesn't appear it would be an option. If we sign a big name post Paul/KD, we would again have to fill out the roster mostly through minimums and exceptions.

The west could also be deep and tough for quite a while given the number of really good young teams and teams starting or getting near the end of their rebuilds.

No matter which way you cut it, we will likely not have a very deep roster unless we can keep finding really good pieces for the minimum or with the exceptions. It's much much easier to build a deep good roster through the draft. The Clips did a pretty good job with depth though despite being well over the cap and not having much for young guys. The Lakers had a pretty good roster before trading a bunch of people for Westbrook.

[Ghost of Kleine]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[lilfishi22]

I'm far more comfortable making this move with Ishbia as the owner than Sarver. You need someone willing to spend in the short term to maximize this window and longer term they will need to spend to offset not having draft picks.

Before the Eeyore's reply with all the worst case scenarios, yes I realize any range of outcomes are possible. But realistically if you're willing to spend money and aren't trying to lose it's unlikely to actually be terrible. So even if **** goes bad down the road it's far more likely you're giving up late lotto picks not top 3.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

100% agree with everything you said. It's about recognising, acknowledging and reconciling the risks you take that makes a gamble a smart one. The range of possibilities because of this trade is now much more varied, the highest are higher, the lowest are lower.

I do wonder though and going back to your statement about an owner willing to spend and thereby minimising the "hurt" from not having all our picks, did we go through essentially a decade of suckage after our 2010 WCF appearance because Sarver just didn't want to spend?

No, he was willing to spend, but he just spent it on the wrong players. That is probably a scenario that could happen when the top tier FAs typically stay put, so you go ahead and spend your cap space on the next best available.

Now you can say he is willing to go into the tax, but that doesn't really matter if you have cap space. You can't just go from having cap space to being in the tax. You go into the tax because you are re-signing your own players or trading them for other players, though that doesn't appear it would be an option. If we sign a big name post Paul/KD, we would again have to fill out the roster mostly through minimums and exceptions.

The west could also be deep and tough for quite a while given the number of really good young teams and teams starting or getting near the end of their rebuilds.

No matter which way you cut it, we will likely not have a very deep roster unless we can keep finding really good pieces for the minimum or with the exceptions. It's much much easier to build a deep good roster through the draft. The Clips did a pretty good job with depth though despite being well over the cap and not having much for young guys. The Lakers had a pretty good roster before trading a bunch of people for Westbrook.

Yeah no I agree that historically having a crap ton of cap space to sign 2-3 high level guys usually doesn't end up well unless you're an LA. Brooklyn did well but that experiment ultimately didn't end well.

More importantly than having cap space is having one true franchise guy that other players want to play with. KD and CP3 "forced" their way to the Suns because they wanted to play with Book. It also makes a ton of sense to build out our scouting department because we need at least rotation guys with our remaining draft picks and we also need to make sure we end up with productive players with our signings or trades.

[Ghost of Kleine]

Read on Twitter

[bwgood77]

100% agree with everything you said. It's about recognising, acknowledging and reconciling the risks you take that makes a gamble a smart one. The range of possibilities because of this trade is now much more varied, the highest are higher, the lowest are lower.

I do wonder though and going back to your statement about an owner willing to spend and thereby minimising the "hurt" from not having all our picks, did we go through essentially a decade of suckage after our 2010 WCF appearance because Sarver just didn't want to spend?

No, he was willing to spend, but he just spent it on the wrong players. That is probably a scenario that could happen when the top tier FAs typically stay put, so you go ahead and spend your cap space on the next best available.

Now you can say he is willing to go into the tax, but that doesn't really matter if you have cap space. You can't just go from having cap space to being in the tax. You go into the tax because you are re-signing your own players or trading them for other players, though that doesn't appear it would be an option. If we sign a big name post Paul/KD, we would again have to fill out the roster mostly through minimums and exceptions.

The west could also be deep and tough for quite a while given the number of really good young teams and teams starting or getting near the end of their rebuilds.

No matter which way you cut it, we will likely not have a very deep roster unless we can keep finding really good pieces for the minimum or with the exceptions. It's much much easier to build a deep good roster through the draft. The Clips did a pretty good job with depth though despite being well over the cap and not having much for young guys. The Lakers had a pretty good roster before trading a bunch of people for Westbrook.

Yeah no I agree that historically having a crap ton of cap space to sign 2-3 high level guys usually doesn't end up well unless you're an LA. Brooklyn did well but that experiment ultimately didn't end well.

More importantly than having cap space is having one true franchise guy that other players want to play with. KD and CP3 "forced" their way to the Suns because they wanted to play with Book. It also makes a ton of sense to build out our scouting department because we need at least rotation guys with our remaining draft picks and we also need to make sure we end up with productive players with our signings or trades.

I am not sure what the cap will look like or if we will still have Ayton, and our 24 pick, though we can continue to re-sign Payne, Craig and maybe Shamet to have tradable pieces or at least depth. The minimum guys, if they are good, will likely make more elsewhere or we can give them the Tax MLE. Cap is projected to be at like $155 million in 2026, so depending on who we have, we will probably have max cap space. Book will make about $56 million in 26-27. Ayton would have a cap hold of maybe high $30s..probably more with cap going up..we could have traded or extended him by then though.

KD will be 38 in 26-27, so if we keep him, he will probably cost over $60 million, so we would probably have space for one close max guy if we have Book and KD and maybe our 24 pick and 26 pick hold. If we still had Ayton (or whoever we trade him for), and have KD and Book, we likely wouldn't have much, if any, cap space. Who knows though? We only pay big money to 3 guys right now and have cheap contracts otherwise (though Shamet is overpaid), so if we retain those salary slots we could be ok.

Prior to then, we just need to stay healthy...the main guys. If they got hurt our depth would suffer, but obviously if they get hurt we are not going anywhere anyway.