The Official 2025 Offseason Thread Part 1

[handsome salary]

Another off season of the Suns organization reacting to the previous seasons failure and other team's success. No vision, no culture, no MVP, no future, no hope.

[Fo-Real]

If the choice comes down to where KD would want or should go, the Spurs should make the most sense to him. You have a team with plenty of cap space, picks and young players to get him without, giving up their most important players. You have a great Pg (on offense AND defense), an absolute freak in the middle who is poised to decide what happens with the league and the rookie of the year (probably wouldn't be touchable in a deal for KD). Fox runs the offense, can score and pass with the best. Wembanyama is a lob threat, post threat and a mountain defensively, he and Fox can control a game alone, having a bucket getter opposite of those two in Durant is the ideal situation for him. Houston is too athletic based for him to run with, the Spurs are about a system.

[BobbieL]

Now the interesting flip side to possibly not trading KD and (also not extending him) running it back and letting him just play out his contract would be that Mikal Bridges is an unrestricted free agent in 26' and Cam Johnson would be an unrestricted free agent in 27 when Beal would come off the books.

Now I get how terrible this scenario seems without getting promising young players and picks back, and we'd likely be bad anyways. BUT.............

Doing this would at least give us upwards of 54 million for the summer of 26' possibly bringing back Bridges, and then 57 million in 27' to then bring back Cam Johnson. So in theory we could at least (if at all clever), bring back the twins, but also use the extra cap space to add other key free agents around Booker and the twins too.

The biggest issue would then be hitting on our late draft picks and/ or adding key pieces in free agency. Now to be clear, I'm not advocating for this to happen.

And I absolutely believe there will be good to very good offers for KD this summer by teams that barely got eliminated and not blown out in the playoffs telling themselves that KD would be the difference maker for them.

I'm only pointing out the silver lining to a worst case scenario playing out and how we could still leverage it towards something positive possibly?? The very worst case scenario would be getting completely fleeced because Gregory has absolutely no front office/GM experience. And taking hack a totally craptastic offer and he and Ishbia touting it like a huge win!

Expirings back for Durant as part of the trade would be fine. Its just getting enough other dollars, so that would mean moving Allen and O'neale for expirings even if the players coming back aren't that good

[BobbieL]

Another off season of the Suns organization reacting to the previous seasons failure and other team's success. No vision, no culture, no MVP, no future, no hope.

My hope is that Ishbia takes a step back, even with Gregory, they create a vision. And the fans actually see that vision
Whether it works or not - at least it makes sense

My fear is he will do the opposite - just a bunch of activity but it doesn't make sense, its not coordinated.

The Suns are keeping Booker - fine. But there is a model that has shown to work around Booker. Be nice if they try to do that. And that doesn't mean bringing back Cam or Mikal - but just trying to build a DEEPER, more BALANCED team.

[sunsbum]

They better bring back Colin. This will be the perfect chance for him to blossom. Take a 2 or 3 year deal and get an opportunity to start.

[BobbieL]

They better bring back Colin. This will be the perfect chance for him to blossom. Take a 2 or 3 year deal and get an opportunity to start.

No brainer

[bwgood77]

Suns already addressed their biggest issues (coach and gm).
The next issue is role players.
KD Book and Beal are not issues

The biggest issue is choosing the right coach. It doesn't matter who is on the roster if this team does not have a legit leader. I do not think we will ever know how much harm Bud did to this team. We do have talent.

Not sure why everyone is hung up on the coach. We recycled through 3 coaches in like 3 seasons, and some of them were championship winning ones. You can have jesusfcgchrist walk on water and preach to these dumb primadonna mofos (who dont fit together to begin with), they will not be doing what jesusfngchrist tells them - so they will not be winning basketball games. But they will be "unbothered".

Yeah, this team is toast. You could take the best parts of Pop, Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach, and anyone else you want to name, meld them together and they couldn't do much with this team or any version of it with trades.

Until we trade Book for a good package we will just be doing this...

Watch on YouTube

Rebuilding elevator would just be the one on the left. We'd be walking the wrong way on the tanking elevator.

[TeamTragic]

Another off season of the Suns organization reacting to the previous seasons failure and other team's success. No vision, no culture, no MVP, no future, no hope.

Our new GM needs to hit a homerun in today's press conference.

[BobbieL]

The biggest issue is choosing the right coach. It doesn't matter who is on the roster if this team does not have a legit leader. I do not think we will ever know how much harm Bud did to this team. We do have talent.

Not sure why everyone is hung up on the coach. We recycled through 3 coaches in like 3 seasons, and some of them were championship winning ones. You can have jesusfcgchrist walk on water and preach to these dumb primadonna mofos (who dont fit together to begin with), they will not be doing what jesusfngchrist tells them - so they will not be winning basketball games. But they will be "unbothered".

Yeah, this team is toast. You could take the best parts of Pop, Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach, and anyone else you want to name, meld them together and they couldn't do much with this team or any version of it with trades.

Until we trade Book for a good package we will just be doing this...

Watch on YouTube

Rebuilding elevator would just be the one on the left. We'd be walking the wrong way on the tanking elevator.

I just wonder what the rationale would be for not trading Booker. Or why it is a non-starter.

I get its probably so fans show up at games but if you lose enough games - nobody is showing up to just see DBook go for 30 but lose by 20

[dremill24]

Not sure why everyone is hung up on the coach. We recycled through 3 coaches in like 3 seasons, and some of them were championship winning ones. You can have jesusfcgchrist walk on water and preach to these dumb primadonna mofos (who dont fit together to begin with), they will not be doing what jesusfngchrist tells them - so they will not be winning basketball games. But they will be "unbothered".

Yeah, this team is toast. You could take the best parts of Pop, Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach, and anyone else you want to name, meld them together and they couldn't do much with this team or any version of it with trades.

Until we trade Book for a good package we will just be doing this...

Watch on YouTube

Rebuilding elevator would just be the one on the left. We'd be walking the wrong way on the tanking elevator.

I just wonder what the rationale would be for not trading Booker. Or why it is a non-starter.

I get its probably so fans show up at games but if you lose enough games - nobody is showing up to just see DBook go for 30 but lose by 20

It just comes down to defining success and expectations. Being 'relevant' (i.e., competing for the post-season) with some level of star power is a minimum goal that many organizations will have. Some dont believe in tearing it all the way down. Teams like Indiana, Chicago, Sacramento, etc. are examples of this. This avoids one of the more straightforward approaches to building a true contender, but even that is no guarantee.

Sure, they want championshipS, but they have a different plan on how they want to get there and a floor they dont want to dip below. Is it the best path to getting there? Probably not, but there is a significant difference between the number of teams who are actually in championship or bust mode (only be a contender or tanking) and the number of teams whose fanbases want that for them.

[bwgood77]

Not sure why everyone is hung up on the coach. We recycled through 3 coaches in like 3 seasons, and some of them were championship winning ones. You can have jesusfcgchrist walk on water and preach to these dumb primadonna mofos (who dont fit together to begin with), they will not be doing what jesusfngchrist tells them - so they will not be winning basketball games. But they will be "unbothered".

Yeah, this team is toast. You could take the best parts of Pop, Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach, and anyone else you want to name, meld them together and they couldn't do much with this team or any version of it with trades.

Until we trade Book for a good package we will just be doing this...

Watch on YouTube

Rebuilding elevator would just be the one on the left. We'd be walking the wrong way on the tanking elevator.

I just wonder what the rationale would be for not trading Booker. Or why it is a non-starter.

I get its probably so fans show up at games but if you lose enough games - nobody is showing up to just see DBook go for 30 but lose by 20

That Luka trade and the backlash didn't help. It's hard to trade a fan favorite. Lillard is another example, but at least he was doing amazing things in the playoffs, even though their ceiling was limited. We just had two seasons with championship coaches, KD, Book and a revolving host of players and got swept and then won what, 35 games?

We kind of saw this coming when we traded for KD but there was the argument that we have a 1 or 2 year window at least. But it's worse than I expected and more bad moves like trading our 31 unprotected have come. I imagine we will trade our 33 or swap our 32 as soon as we can. We didn't even have a plan in place for that trade of our unprotected pick. At least we do have late picks at least...for now. Have to strike gold. That's really the only chance.

But if we hang onto Book he will likely want out within a year, maybe by the trade deadline. A trade of him to Houston for at least our 27, 29 and maybe one of their picks and prospects will likely still be on the table for another year. Unless Houston gets Cooper Flagg with our pick.

I guess even perhaps then because they will start to have expiring guards and won't really need more picks but more impact players.

[bwgood77]

Yeah, this team is toast. You could take the best parts of Pop, Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach, and anyone else you want to name, meld them together and they couldn't do much with this team or any version of it with trades.

Until we trade Book for a good package we will just be doing this...

Watch on YouTube

Rebuilding elevator would just be the one on the left. We'd be walking the wrong way on the tanking elevator.

I just wonder what the rationale would be for not trading Booker. Or why it is a non-starter.

I get its probably so fans show up at games but if you lose enough games - nobody is showing up to just see DBook go for 30 but lose by 20

It just comes down to defining success and expectations. Being 'relevant' (i.e., competing for the post-season) with some level of star power is a minimum goal that many organizations will have. Some dont believe in tearing it all the way down. Teams like Indiana, Chicago, Sacramento, etc. are examples of this. This avoids one of the more straightforward approaches to building a true contender, but even that is no guarantee.

Sure, they want championshipS, but they have a different plan on how they want to get there and a floor they dont want to dip below. Is it the best path to getting there? Probably not, but there is a significant difference between the number of teams who are actually in championship or bust mode (only be a contender or tanking) and the number of teams whose fanbases want that for them.

Yeah, you're right, and I actually don't mind that approach if you do it right, and don't trade away like 4 years of unprotected picks like we did. Like if we had kept our core and made minor moves, kept drafting with out picks in the teens, etc, and maybe hit on someone or found a nice free agent signing (like we actually have) would have been fine. At least that was a fun team to watch.

The problem is I don't really see how we won't be a bottom 3 or 4 team in the west anyway. I am unsure who will we be better than. Maybe one or two teams decide to tank now, but the younger teams are likely to start competing more like Portland and Utah. Maybe the Kings are worse. They are in a somewhat similar predicament but have better assets and more picks to utilize.

[BobbieL]

Yeah, this team is toast. You could take the best parts of Pop, Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach, and anyone else you want to name, meld them together and they couldn't do much with this team or any version of it with trades.

Until we trade Book for a good package we will just be doing this...

Watch on YouTube

Rebuilding elevator would just be the one on the left. We'd be walking the wrong way on the tanking elevator.

I just wonder what the rationale would be for not trading Booker. Or why it is a non-starter.

I get its probably so fans show up at games but if you lose enough games - nobody is showing up to just see DBook go for 30 but lose by 20

It just comes down to defining success and expectations. Being 'relevant' (i.e., competing for the post-season) with some level of star power is a minimum goal that many organizations will have. Some dont believe in tearing it all the way down. Teams like Indiana, Chicago, Sacramento, etc. are examples of this. This avoids one of the more straightforward approaches to building a true contender, but even that is no guarantee.

Sure, they want championshipS, but they have a different plan on how they want to get there and a floor they dont want to dip below. Is it the best path to getting there? Probably not, but there is a significant difference between the number of teams who are actually in championship or bust mode (only be a contender or tanking) and the number of teams whose fanbases want that for them.

Thats a reasoned response and when put that way - it does sound reasonable.

But I just am not sure they can get the right team around Booker to build up to even being in the play-in game with short sighted moves. It is going to take patience and discipline from Ishbia - I think the next two years should be rough But it sounds like Ishbia would rather stretch Beal to use the MLE (short term move), plus "on the edges" trades that are just moving players not really improving the roster.

I get its no guarantee blowing it up gets you a title but if you want to build around Booker - the next two years should be lean years

[BobbieL]

I just wonder what the rationale would be for not trading Booker. Or why it is a non-starter.

I get its probably so fans show up at games but if you lose enough games - nobody is showing up to just see DBook go for 30 but lose by 20

It just comes down to defining success and expectations. Being 'relevant' (i.e., competing for the post-season) with some level of star power is a minimum goal that many organizations will have. Some dont believe in tearing it all the way down. Teams like Indiana, Chicago, Sacramento, etc. are examples of this. This avoids one of the more straightforward approaches to building a true contender, but even that is no guarantee.

Sure, they want championshipS, but they have a different plan on how they want to get there and a floor they dont want to dip below. Is it the best path to getting there? Probably not, but there is a significant difference between the number of teams who are actually in championship or bust mode (only be a contender or tanking) and the number of teams whose fanbases want that for them.

Yeah, you're right, and I actually don't mind that approach if you do it right, and don't trade away like 4 years of unprotected picks like we did. Like if we had kept our core and made minor moves, kept drafting with out picks in the teens, etc, and maybe hit on someone or found a nice free agent signing (like we actually have) would have been fine. At least that was a fun team to watch.

The problem is I don't really see how we won't be a bottom 3 or 4 team in the west anyway. I am unsure who will we be better than. Maybe one or two teams decide to tank now, but the younger teams are likely to start competing more like Portland and Utah. Maybe the Kings are worse. They are in a somewhat similar predicament but have better assets and more picks to utilize.

Correct - it was a fun team to watch. And I wouldn't mind a 25 win team next year - built around Booker -though I think they should trade him if they try to get some elements of that team back. Building - just no quick fix stupid moves. And stretching Beal for fives years or trading a draft pick with Beal would be stupid. Trading Durant for a player like Markkanen, for me, with a terrible contract, would be stupid (yes it would be a three team trade).

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

I just wonder what the rationale would be for not trading Booker. Or why it is a non-starter.

I get its probably so fans show up at games but if you lose enough games - nobody is showing up to just see DBook go for 30 but lose by 20

It just comes down to defining success and expectations. Being 'relevant' (i.e., competing for the post-season) with some level of star power is a minimum goal that many organizations will have. Some dont believe in tearing it all the way down. Teams like Indiana, Chicago, Sacramento, etc. are examples of this. This avoids one of the more straightforward approaches to building a true contender, but even that is no guarantee.

Sure, they want championshipS, but they have a different plan on how they want to get there and a floor they dont want to dip below. Is it the best path to getting there? Probably not, but there is a significant difference between the number of teams who are actually in championship or bust mode (only be a contender or tanking) and the number of teams whose fanbases want that for them.

Thats a reasoned response and when put that way - it does sound reasonable.

But I just am not sure they can get the right team around Booker to build up to even being in the play-in game with short sighted moves. It is going to take patience and discipline from Ishbia - I think the next two years should be rough But it sounds like Ishbia would rather stretch Beal to use the MLE (short term move), plus "on the edges" trades that are just moving players not really improving the roster.

I get its no guarantee blowing it up gets you a title but if you want to build around Booker - the next two years should be lean years

The reason we won't trade Booker is simple. To trade Booker is to tank, and we can't tank because we don't own our picks.

Houston is the only team that can give us any value back in a Booker deal, since our remainder of WAS's swap rights have been re-swapped by us into worthlessness - WAS couldn't give us our pick back if they wanted to! If we try to tank without first getting a substantial amount of our picks back, we destroy any leverage to get them back in the future as they would become too valuable. In other words, we have to try to win as much as possible to maintain at least some leverage in negotiations to get our picks back, which is a precondition for rebuilding.

I don't think an NBA franchise has ever been as stuck as the Phoenix Suns are right now.

I still can't believe we traded our '31 to the Jazz for three borderline SRPs. I lost a lot of faith in the organization that day - and in so many strangers online who seemed to think it was a good deal.

Booker breaking all kinds of Suns records will be the only thing for us to cheer for over the next several years.

[Saberestar]

A new name as a candidate for Suns HC job.

Washington Wizards assistant coach Adam Caporn is among those expected to draw consideration for the vacant head coaching position for the Suns, HoopsHype has learned.

Caporn was recently named head coach of Australia’s men’s national basketball team after serving as an assistant over the program’s last four major tournament campaigns, including winning a bronze medal at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics.

https://hoopshype.com/lists/nba-intel-free-agency-for-malik-beasley-dennis-schroeder-ty-jerome-suns-nuggets-pelicans/

[BobbieL]

It just comes down to defining success and expectations. Being 'relevant' (i.e., competing for the post-season) with some level of star power is a minimum goal that many organizations will have. Some dont believe in tearing it all the way down. Teams like Indiana, Chicago, Sacramento, etc. are examples of this. This avoids one of the more straightforward approaches to building a true contender, but even that is no guarantee.

Sure, they want championshipS, but they have a different plan on how they want to get there and a floor they dont want to dip below. Is it the best path to getting there? Probably not, but there is a significant difference between the number of teams who are actually in championship or bust mode (only be a contender or tanking) and the number of teams whose fanbases want that for them.

Thats a reasoned response and when put that way - it does sound reasonable.

But I just am not sure they can get the right team around Booker to build up to even being in the play-in game with short sighted moves. It is going to take patience and discipline from Ishbia - I think the next two years should be rough But it sounds like Ishbia would rather stretch Beal to use the MLE (short term move), plus "on the edges" trades that are just moving players not really improving the roster.

I get its no guarantee blowing it up gets you a title but if you want to build around Booker - the next two years should be lean years

The reason we won't trade Booker is simple. To trade Booker is to tank, and we can't tank because we don't own our picks.

Houston is the only team that can give us any value back in a Booker deal, since our remainder of WAS's swap rights have been re-swapped by us into worthlessness - WAS couldn't give us our pick back if they wanted to! If we try to tank without first getting a substantial amount of our picks back, we destroy any leverage to get them back in the future as they would become too valuable. In other words, we have to try to win as much as possible to maintain at least some leverage in negotiations to get our picks back, which is a precondition for rebuilding.

I don't think an NBA franchise has ever been as stuck as the Phoenix Suns are right now.

I still can't believe we traded our '31 to the Jazz for three borderline SRPs. I lost a lot of faith in the organization that day - and in so many strangers online who seemed to think it was a good deal.

Booker breaking all kinds of Suns records will be the only thing for us to cheer for over the next several years.

Now that theory makes the most sense... good point.

Personally, I hope this offseason Ishbia and Gregory prove my cynical backside wrong and put together a team around Booker that makes sense.

[Rebound Mound]

I wonder whether the Bucks could accept a Giannis for Booker+things/players.
Giannis is a far better player, but he is 2 years older.
Booker could pair with Lillard in a year and they will tank for a year without Lillard, López gone.
The thing is that I do not see Giannis with a desire to come here. Hey, why would any player come to this franchise now, if you can decide... ???

[dremill24]

I just wonder what the rationale would be for not trading Booker. Or why it is a non-starter.

I get its probably so fans show up at games but if you lose enough games - nobody is showing up to just see DBook go for 30 but lose by 20

It just comes down to defining success and expectations. Being 'relevant' (i.e., competing for the post-season) with some level of star power is a minimum goal that many organizations will have. Some dont believe in tearing it all the way down. Teams like Indiana, Chicago, Sacramento, etc. are examples of this. This avoids one of the more straightforward approaches to building a true contender, but even that is no guarantee.

Sure, they want championshipS, but they have a different plan on how they want to get there and a floor they dont want to dip below. Is it the best path to getting there? Probably not, but there is a significant difference between the number of teams who are actually in championship or bust mode (only be a contender or tanking) and the number of teams whose fanbases want that for them.

Thats a reasoned response and when put that way - it does sound reasonable.

But I just am not sure they can get the right team around Booker to build up to even being in the play-in game with short sighted moves. It is going to take patience and discipline from Ishbia - I think the next two years should be rough But it sounds like Ishbia would rather stretch Beal to use the MLE (short term move), plus "on the edges" trades that are just moving players not really improving the roster.

I get its no guarantee blowing it up gets you a title but if you want to build around Booker - the next two years should be lean years

I agree in thinking it is not going to work out the way they hope. I'm not really arguing FOR their approach, just putting it out there that there are many ways to define success and to try to reach it. If [proverbial] you have a different goal than they do, of course you're going to disagree with their path.

[BobbieL]

It just comes down to defining success and expectations. Being 'relevant' (i.e., competing for the post-season) with some level of star power is a minimum goal that many organizations will have. Some dont believe in tearing it all the way down. Teams like Indiana, Chicago, Sacramento, etc. are examples of this. This avoids one of the more straightforward approaches to building a true contender, but even that is no guarantee.

Sure, they want championshipS, but they have a different plan on how they want to get there and a floor they dont want to dip below. Is it the best path to getting there? Probably not, but there is a significant difference between the number of teams who are actually in championship or bust mode (only be a contender or tanking) and the number of teams whose fanbases want that for them.

Thats a reasoned response and when put that way - it does sound reasonable.

But I just am not sure they can get the right team around Booker to build up to even being in the play-in game with short sighted moves. It is going to take patience and discipline from Ishbia - I think the next two years should be rough But it sounds like Ishbia would rather stretch Beal to use the MLE (short term move), plus "on the edges" trades that are just moving players not really improving the roster.

I get its no guarantee blowing it up gets you a title but if you want to build around Booker - the next two years should be lean years

I agree in thinking it is not going to work out the way they hope. I'm not really arguing FOR their approach, just putting it out there that there are many ways to define success and to try to reach it. If [proverbial] you have a different goal than they do, of course you're going to disagree with their path.

Listening to Gregory --- I don't like to put too much stock into these press conferences

But I hope his actions are better than this nonsense he is spewing. Alignment (drink)
Michigan State (drink)