Trade & FA Ideas & Discussion

[AtheJ415]

Similar to Cousins, George, Butler it depends whether he extends or not.

2 years of a player vs 6 years of a player technically the packages should be 3 times more / less.

Not quite so simple. You lose the cap space to sign an FA at the max also. That should be a factor here. For instance, if Cousins was an FA in 2 years instead of this offseason, we could no longer afford him if supermaxing Kyrie.

[AtheJ415]

At the end of the day, Phoenix can really only afford to do this trade if it clearly benefits us. That can only happen if it is Bledsoe plus something minor, like a protected pick, with vet role players (Dudley or Chandler), while taking on just 1 bad contract. Frankly, that is all very fair given the small actual gap in Bledsoe and Irving's productivity. If it isn't enough, then just move on and continue to build through the draft.

[dremill24]

Spoiler:

The Suns don't need to force the Cavs to make a trade. The situation and clock favor Phoenix here--not Cleveland. Kyrie's value will only go down once the season starts. Also, that is simply an overpay of epic proportions for a mediocre, at best, upgrade over Bled.

I mean you're right, they don't. I guess I'm just speaking in the context of the Suns (or any team, I'm really speaking on principles here) wanting to make a deal for Kyrie (or established star player X). Point being, unless you have extreme, PG-like circumstances, you have to make an offer that will actually entice the other team, hence the term 'trade.'

I also think people are overstating the Cavs' NEED to move Kyrie. He's under contract for 2 more years. They've made 3 straight Finals with one title even with a Kyrie who apparently isn't crazy about playing with LeBron. I think a lot of us are being quite homer-ish in stating how Cleveland has no leverage and have to make a deal with whatever team makes the best offer. We'd like it to be that way, but unless the situation takes a completely drastic and toxic turn, I don't see him getting dealt at all unless it's for an offer that they truly like.

And to be clear, I personally have not offered an opinion on including Chriss in a deal, I was simply commenting on referring to him as a throw in. I don't think anyone who includes him in a proposal thinks of him that way, they're just trying to come up with a piece that can be added that Cleveland might value enough to get them to bite, while still being a piece that SOME feel would be expendable from our end.

The offer simply needs to beat all other offers. Hence, it only has to be more enticing than the other offers, and not necessarily enticing to the trading team at all. Once a team commits to having to trade a guy, the option of keeping him becomes incredibly undesireable. CLE is at that place/in that spot. And I would argue that the proposal you put is more than Chicago got for Butler, NO for Cousins, or Indy for PG, and those guys didn't openly ask for a trade (George simply said he was not going to re-sign, so the team chose to trade him).

What proposal? I've offered nothing.

And again, you're making the assumption that Cleveland has no option other than to trade him for the best offer, no matter how bad it is.

As a side note, practically speaking, George forced the Pacers hand, and basically demanded a trade, at least functionally. That situation is as close to NEEDING to trade a player as it gets. I feel like people (those that want the Cavs to trade Kyrie to their team anyway) are acting like the Kyrie situation is the same as the George one, and it's not.

If the asking price is too high, then you decline and move on. But I think we need to stop acting like he MUST be dealt at a major discount.

[JDLAW]

My take:

-This refutes everything that Gambo has been saying. Talks are still on going and the Kryie to Phoenix plan is NOT dead.

- Im guessing from Bickley's Cleveland "Source", Once we took Jackson off the table and told Cleveland to try again, this was Cleveland's next idea (Bender & Chriss).

- When it comes to negotiations it works like this: Team A calls Team B about a player. Team A asks "What do you want for him". Team B replies with what they want. Team A says no, we cant do that, how about this. Team B says no, we insist on Jackson. Team A says, no can do Jackson isnt being traded, find a better deal elsewhere. Team B calls back with a different idea. Now its up to Team A to take the new trade idea, or refute it with something else. Eventually the two teams will settle somewhere in the middle. Its a game of back and forth and seeing who will flinch first. Cleveland has to trade Irving, while we dont have to trade anyone, so more than likely Cleveland (Team B) will flinch first and give in at some point.

Did you listen to Bickley? He said Cleveland had no interest in Chriss or Bender when the Suns offered it.

Yeah, i was just editing my post to reflect why i believe what i do when you quoted me.

They are not getting Jackson. We know this. They know this. We also know that all this information is leaking out of Cleveland like a siv. I mean we have heard about damn near every "offer" from multiple teams. Whys that? Because the Cavs are feeding reporters info, and what i believe is bad info. Supposedly the Wolves offered Wiggins+ for Irving. I dont believe that one bit. I think the Cavs "Leaked" that out so the Suns would up their offer (Including Jackson). McD didnt fall for it. I bet he made them a reasonable offer, and they still want more, so now the Cav's put word out there that we "offered" Chriss AND Bender (Along with Bledsoe and a pick), but it wasnt good enough so they turned it down, in hopes of another team (Maybe the Wolves) coming back to the table and upping their offer more than what they previously offered.

Look, the Cavs are in a **** situation. They want a Blue Chip prospect, but the only teams that really have blue chip prospects arnt really contenders with or without Irving, so why risk sending that young stud away when Irving can walk in a few years. The contender teams that could really use Irving dont have any Blue Chips or honestly anything for that matter to offer Cleveland. And the Cavs are at a point where they have to trade Irving, so they are the ones that benefit the most of leaking out all these fake proposals out there to get some kind of little bit of leverage back so they can try to get the most they can from the few teams that they are still talking with.

Like seriously, when have you ever heard this much info on a daily basis for well over a week being leaked out of a FO? I'd say like everyday there has been 3+ new updates on what teams are talking to them, what offers have been made, etc etc. Thats because the FO is giving phony info out left and right to hurry up and get in a better position at the negotiating table.

That is what i believe 110%!

Here we go again, in 1999 the Suns drafted a kid out of UNLV named Shawn Marion. Dan Bickley trashed the Suns for taking Marion over Cory Maggetti. After the draft, the Suns began trade talks for Penny Hardaway. Magic were demanding Marion, Suns were saying no. The parallels are eerily to what is happening now.

Bickley essentially published the same Op/Ed piece then as he did today. The only difference was he trashed Marion calling his draft a mistake. That’s when I learned to ignore Bickley, which has served me well over the years.

[NBA Fiend]

Long live Backcourt 2000.

[cberry78]

Long live Backcourt 2000.

FTW!

[DirtyDez]

Did you listen to Bickley? He said Cleveland had no interest in Chriss or Bender when the Suns offered it.

Yeah, i was just editing my post to reflect why i believe what i do when you quoted me.

They are not getting Jackson. We know this. They know this. We also know that all this information is leaking out of Cleveland like a siv. I mean we have heard about damn near every "offer" from multiple teams. Whys that? Because the Cavs are feeding reporters info, and what i believe is bad info. Supposedly the Wolves offered Wiggins+ for Irving. I dont believe that one bit. I think the Cavs "Leaked" that out so the Suns would up their offer (Including Jackson). McD didnt fall for it. I bet he made them a reasonable offer, and they still want more, so now the Cav's put word out there that we "offered" Chriss AND Bender (Along with Bledsoe and a pick), but it wasnt good enough so they turned it down, in hopes of another team (Maybe the Wolves) coming back to the table and upping their offer more than what they previously offered.

Look, the Cavs are in a **** situation. They want a Blue Chip prospect, but the only teams that really have blue chip prospects arnt really contenders with or without Irving, so why risk sending that young stud away when Irving can walk in a few years. The contender teams that could really use Irving dont have any Blue Chips or honestly anything for that matter to offer Cleveland. And the Cavs are at a point where they have to trade Irving, so they are the ones that benefit the most of leaking out all these fake proposals out there to get some kind of little bit of leverage back so they can try to get the most they can from the few teams that they are still talking with.

Like seriously, when have you ever heard this much info on a daily basis for well over a week being leaked out of a FO? I'd say like everyday there has been 3+ new updates on what teams are talking to them, what offers have been made, etc etc. Thats because the FO is giving phony info out left and right to hurry up and get in a better position at the negotiating table.

That is what i believe 110%!

Here we go again, in 1999 the Suns drafted a kid out of UNLV named Shawn Marion. Dan Bickley trashed the Suns for taking Marion over Cory Maggetti. After the draft, the Suns began trade talks for Penny Hardaway. Magic were demanding Marion, Suns were saying no. The parallels are eerily to what is happening now.

Bickley essentially published the same Op/Ed piece then as he did today. The only difference was he trashed Marion calling his draft a mistake. That’s when I learned to ignore Bickley, which has served me well over the years.

I remember wanting Artest. He could score, pass, shoot and defend at St John's. Now we know why he slipped so far. Teams knew he had demons but the internet era wasn't around yet and we really knew nothing about these guys like we do now.

Bickley's just a journalist itching for the best story. The Timeline is about as dull as a storyline gets.

[thamadkant]

Long live Backcourt 2000.

FTW!

In fairness, a healthy tandem of Penny and Kidd would be top 3 today...
Both amazing both sides of the court and AMAZING vision...

[King4Day]

I have a bad feeling that we told Jackson we aren't trading him to keep rumors down.
Once the month is up and he's eligible to be traded, I worry that's when we'll hear something.

[Mulhollanddrive]

Minnesota board only 16% of their fans would trade Wiggins for Irving.

Fans are weird.

[Damkac]

How many Suns fans would trade Booker for Irving? Or Jackson?

[Mulhollanddrive]

If they did it they'd be George, Cousins or Butler in FA from having one of a few Big Fours in history, yet 84% nope.

[Phystic]

The reason we'd need to contend for, at the very least, the playoffs right away with Irving is because he will be an unrestricted free agent in just 2 years. Trading for him, losing games and then losing him for nothing as a free agent would be a complete disaster.

And I agree that Irving is more talented than Bledsoe, but I don't know that his talent translates to winning games when he isn't being lifted up by one of the greatest players in history. The stats so far say "no".

I'm for consolidating our assets somewhere down the line (and for moving Warren before having to pay him 15+ million a year, I like the guy buy he is too limited to throw a ton of money at) but I think Irving is fools gold.

And that's all completely fair. But you have to take some of that stuff with a grain of salt. For instance,it's assuming Irving would walk. ANY player we trade for is going to have the exact same circumstances. When was the last time a star player was traded with a 4 or 5 years remaining on their contract? It's always a couple years or even expiring. So unless a star player flat out says "I want to play in Phoenix and only Phoenix" it will always be a gamble trading for a star player. And keep in mind, we will be able to offer Irving more money than anyway, and that may not be a guarantee like it once was, but it's still a huge + for us.

And ya I know the stats Irving as a total ****show when Lebron is off the floor or even pre-lebron. But keep in mind the make-up of the team as well as the mentality. Irving very well may have tried to press and show how great he is when Lebron wasn't there. That wouldn't necessarily be the case when he has "his own" team. He would know he's the centerpiece and not a complimentary player. Now that doesn't mean he still isn't an incapable leader and facilitator, that could still very well be the case. However, sometimes you have to gamble in sports. We've seen to at least some degree what Irving is capable of. We don't know what he's capable of when he's away from the Cavs and Lebron. Harden struggled at times in OKC, and many thought he wasn't star material after his horrible Finals and now look at him. Carmelo was once thought of as the same level of talent as Lebron and could lead a team, that quickly was proven untrue. Nash was a broken down point guard and then completely changed the NBA. Different situations can have a huge impact on a players game and mentality.

With that said, I agree Irving may not translate into many wins. However, is that necessarily a bad thing for THIS year? If we can land Irving while keeping our young core(say Bledsoe, Dudley/Chandler, Miami '18 and Future Suns 1st) and still land a top 5 pick. That would be an absolutely buttload of assets and talent.Sure it may not be what Irving wants but it could also be a situation like the Warriors where players can grow together as a team. I think landing Irving for the Suns is strictly a matter of what we give up and the results as far W/L shouldn't be a huge factor in the SHORT TERM. In this proposed trade, even IF Irving walks we wouldn't lose anything of major value. Sure it would still hurt but it wouldn't be disastrous IMO.

First bolded part: He did give a list of 4 teams he wanted to go to.

Second bolded part: If that is the deal I'd probably role the dice, but I'd need that future pick to have protection on it that didn't run out....turned into 2 2nds later.

1. I know he did. And ya the Suns aren't on it. My point is it is extremely unlikely that an available star/superstar has Phoenix on a list like that. So ANY potential trade scenario, whether it be Irving or someone else, will have that risk of them not resigning because of it.

2. Yup I agree. Would definitely have protection. Whether it be top 5 or top 10 or lotto is up for debate. But definitely NOT unprotected.

[Jarlaxle0204]

I hope they aren't considering trading Bender. I really believe in that kid. I think he's going to be integral to our future. Booker/Jackson/Bender are on my no trade list.

[JMac1]

I hope they aren't considering trading Bender. I really believe in that kid. I think he's going to be integral to our future. Booker/Jackson/Bender are on my no trade list.

19,20,20 soon 20,20,21 when season starts. It's not just about keeping potential over a proven player, it's also, maybe we just don't like what the proven player has proved.

People outside of our fan base seem to not understand that. We don't want a "star" player just for the heck if it, especially when he has flaws in his game and is, although young, five years older than our possible core. So to break that up for a two year rental player that is already displaying that bs "I want to play here" crap over I just want to be on a good team.....just a bad omen waiting to happen.


No need to rewind and start over again in two years, unless it is Bled and Miami, maybe Chriss (has nothing to do with SL).

To me Booker, JJ, and Bender seem perfect for each other's game. If it fails, so be it, but you cannot not try just because of past busts of the NBA, especially when you have nothing to lose.

Like you said. I am starting to like Bender more and more. 7'1 guy moves like he is 6'8, can pass and has a solid stroke at 19, and is a willing defender and you don't have to worry about him screwing the team because he wants to play in LA or NY or Chicago.... I love Duncan for not being that guy....and Parker and Ginobli.

[Gorilla Warfare]

How many Suns fans would trade Booker for Irving? Or Jackson?

I wouldn't trade Booker for anyone but LeBron, Curry, Westbrook, or Durant.

[JMac1]

How many Suns fans would trade Booker for Irving? Or Jackson?

I wouldn't trade Booker for anyone but LeBron, Curry, Westbrook, or Durant.

Those guys are too old!

Don't want for the tail-end of their career. I want to have our own Curry or Durant or Lebron at 22. Not 30. I'm tired of that Shaq ****.

[Frank Lee]

Considering McD's past off seasons... he has been quite restrained. He was shuffling 5-6 new players in each year it seemed. Perhaps he realizes making just a few adjustments is far less riskier, and that some continuity may pay off. This could be the season where his best move, is the one he didn't make.

[King4Day]

Anyone else feel like the Spurs gave Pau way too much money and too many years? Is he really still that good?

[carey]

Anyone else feel like the Spurs gave Pau way too much money and too many years? Is he really still that good?

He added a nice 3-point shot this year & has turned himself into a decent stretch 5. His defense leaves a lot to be desired these days. Still an excellent passer though.