Trade & FA Ideas & Discussion #5: A Serving of Irving?

[ATTL]

If we give up the farm for kyrie, what's the difference between us and Portland? Are you OK fighting for that coveted 8th seed for half a decade before starting over yet again?

[enigmatics]

I just don't buy this approach of rebuilding exclusively through the draft. There's talent in every draft but there's a ton of duds too. You're absolutely taking a risk by giving up assets for Kyrie but let's not pretend like there's no risk in hoping and relying on our young players to turn into half the star Kyrie is.

Blame the Warriors.

Now everyone and their mother thinks building thru the draft is the only way - when in reality it's rare. You need a quality FO, quality scouts, and an ass ton of good luck. That sound like the Suns to you? Let's not forget we don't even have a coach who's credentials include player development.

[RaisingArizona]

I would not give up more than Bledsoe + 2018 Miami pick and do not care how homer that sounds.

Sounds pretty homer.

[Preacherpj]

I don't want Kyrie and want to continue with #thetimeline. In that vein, the T&T board has basically all but agreed to Bled & Melo to CLE, Ntilikina to PHX, and Kyrie to NYK. That is the route I prefer to go. Keep both of next year's picks, all of the young guys, start Ulis/Booker/Jackson/Warren/Chandler or Len. I think that is the best we can do.

1 - Melo isn't going to Cleveland I think he's come out again and said "Houston or nobody'.
2 - We already have so many rookies, we don't need two more picks next year and another rookie in Ntilikina.
3 - Kyrie fits our #timeline.

You know one of the more amazing things about rookies? After a season they are no longer rookies. So right now we have Jackson, Reed and Peters (who we havent signed). Now since having rookie and players on their rookie salary ensure that we are keeping good cost control you might rethink your statement before we give away a 1st over all pick.

Who said anything about giving a 1st overall pick? I didn't know we had one of those to give away? I said I'd trade a protected PHX pick with the idea of protection around 1-5.

[Qwigglez]

If we give up the farm for kyrie, what's the difference between us and Portland? Are you OK fighting for that coveted 8th seed for half a decade before starting over yet again?

Blazers have their cap tied up in role players and scrubs such as Evan Turner and Meyers Leonard. They made a good move by trading for Nurkic but I believe he's a RFA next offseason, luckily they traded Allen Crabbe to likely use that money to pay Nurkic. Anyhow, our team is still growing and hopefully Jackson/Bender turn into more than just starters. We gotta start somewhere though, and we may in a situation similar to what the Warriors were in when they were able to sign Durant. What I mean by that is, we'll have the cap space in 2019 to still go after top guys, Booker/Jackson may have developed even further yet they will still be on their rookie contracts. So we could max out our cap space on possibly another all-star or two, and then still extend Booker/Jackson.

[Preacherpj]

If we give up the farm for kyrie, what's the difference between us and Portland? Are you OK fighting for that coveted 8th seed for half a decade before starting over yet again?

Who's talking about giving up the farm?

In general people are talking about
Bledsoe, Chris or Bender, one draft pick -- maybe two + maybe a Davon Reed

So even in that scenario; where we trade Bled, Chriss, Miami 18, Phx (protected) 19, and Reed.

we would still have
Booker
Warren
Bender or Chriss
Jackson
Ulis
Miami unprotected

To me that's not giving up the farm.

I think its OK to say, we are targeting 2020, while also being opportunistic when a player like Kyrie becomes available.

[carey]

Some interesting takes lately. Irving's value hasn't fallen because Melo only wants Houston.

The Suns don't become Portland if they trade for Kyrie. They won't even be as good. They become a bit better offensively but worse defensively plus lose another asset or two.

Drafting isn't the best way to build a contender? It has been shown repeatedly on this board that it is. Is it the only way? No. It is the most common and lasting way though.

[Beetlejuice]

And what if we never get to the stage where we're "ready to compete"? You say it's a waste of time if Irving walks. You could say the same thing if in 3-4 years when we should be ready to compete and we're not ready. We're seeing that with Len now. What if down the road we're in the same situation with Chriss and Bender as we are now with Len? Right now, the only player close to a sure thing is Booker and even he has a ton of question marks around his efficiency, defense and ability to lead a team. There's no reason not to bring in a guy like Irving, who fits the core, who brings elite offense and championship experience. This team can learn a lot from that sort of experience and leadership. And ultimately, who are you giving up? Chriss? Maybe Warren? Bledsoe? At the very least, one of those three guys likely won't be with us in two season.

To me there every reason not to want Kyrie starting off with the fact that he is a selfish player in a position that demands unselfishness. Other teams overcome this by having other players become the primary distributor (i.e. Lebron James or Draymond Green) but Kyrie wants the ball in his hands at all time. He is a point guard who job is to create for others and so far he would be rated poor for that fact alone. To top this off the Suns real weakness are defense and passing both areas that that Kyrie wont help in. As a matter of fact his presence alone will likely take rebounding into a critical area due to the drop in rebounding from Bledsoe to Kyrie. The only thing that Kyrie brings to the table is that he is closer in age to our core.

I am frankly tied of these combo guards who dont pass thinking that they have any right to be a point guard. Allen Iverson is one of the worst things that has ever happened to the NBA and you are seeing the same type of player in Kyrie.

This is mostly correct.

Im scared .

This cant top Brandon Knight trade, but is this that much different? Lets bring in another me first guy in PG spot. Havent we already seen that in mr. Knight PG adventures. At least we can cut our losses with him.

Bring kyrie in, we are unlikely to ever get rid of him. He just shoots too well , has so much flash that all his inabilities to make us a real winner gets overlooked in perpetuity.

As i have come to suspect, Kyrie lacks the coveted ability to make ones offence "hum". He has those incredible offensive performances which make your eyes bleed rainbows... but they are rainbows, they only come when its raining on a sunny day.

Bledsoe is missing that "hum" factor too, but he comes 10 to 15 million cheaper( that still gives us a chance to find a real difference maker). And im not convinced that Kyrie is even a better player. If we start adding value to offering of Bledsoe and pay Kyrie 35 million, we are going to be losers, big losers in this trade.

[Puff]

Until you can compete whats the point of trading for a superstar?

As stacked as the west is we wont even get close to the playoffs with irving...

Besides that if he leaves in two years we lost assets for nothing....We will just be in the same boat.

Although a boat with a few holes in it.

We have the youngest team in the league and like many have said we don't know what they are worth or who they are!

Exactly....LETS FIND OUT!

We get it.

1. You do not like any move for Kyrie Irving.
2. We do no need a superstar for this team.
3. We need to continue to develop only young guys.

OK

1. Who is the perfect player that we should bring in and when?
2. At what point should we stop losing between 55 and 60 games every year?
3. At what point should we stop being irrelevant?
etc, etc, etc

No one really knows what is going to happen if we do in fact acquire Kyrie Irving. In addition no one really knows whom we will get in the upcoming drafts if we continue to tank. In addition no one knows what free agents will be available for us in the future.

Kyrie appears to be available while being an above average talent. He is regarded by many to be a potential superstar talent down the road. We appear to have the assets to acquire him. He appears to be a perfect addition to Booker and Jackson. You can not pick and choose whom or when you can acquire a superstar for your team.

This is my reason for being interested in Kyrie. When it appeared that Blake Griffin was available earlier this summer, I wanted him as well. These type of players are rarely available.

I suggest you go through the list of free agents that are still available. There are many players that folks thought we should acquire at some point. Now they are on their way to China or Europe. This is not an exact science.

Name one team that has had great success that has not at some point acquired a great talent from another team.

[JJ13]

Kyrie doesn't need to be pass-first since Ulis, Booker, Jackson and Bender are all great passers. And enough with the defense whining. We just added Jackson who can guard 1-4, and still have Dudley/Tyson to put in the grunt work. Not to mention Ulis being an above average defender. I can definitely see a line-up with Ulis at PG, Kyrie at SG, Booker sliding to SF and Jackson playing PF once he bulks up. That is a versatile offensive & defensive line-up. Throw in Tyson to bang with KAT, Jordan, etc.

Ulis + defender/passer
Kryie + shot creator/scorer
Booker +shot creator/scorer
Jackson +defender/passer/rebounding
Bender +passer/finisher/rim protector
Tyson +defender/rebounding

That is not a terrible defensive team, especially if we keep Reed.

[jredsaz]

If we give up the farm for kyrie, what's the difference between us and Portland? Are you OK fighting for that coveted 8th seed for half a decade before starting over yet again?

I don't think Bledsoe, Jackson, and the Miami pick would qualify as the farm much less swapping out Jackson for Chriss or Warren. We have a lot more assets and wiggle room than Protland does. That comp is just not accurate at all.

Sent from my SM-N920V using RealGM mobile app

[WeekapaugGroove]

Been on vacation up in the northwoods of Wisconsin so haven't followed this thread but doesn't the kyrie situation ultimately come down to his likelihood of resigning in two years? If they feel it's going to be tough to extend him then I totally get not giving up the farm for him. Now it still might be worth a gamble but only at a price they are comfortable with.

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app

[Puff]

I'd do Jackson for Irving straight up. If nothing else is involved

I said no.

1. Jackson is 20
2. Jackson is better defensively
3. Jackson should be better all around
4. Jackson fits with the Timeline i.e. Booker
5. Jackson is ours for 7 years

Just to name a few....plus he is a Sun...no other teams doo doo comes with him.

I did not vote yet but will vote no. I agree with your projections but to be honest that is all they are at this point, projections. Jackson has not played one game in the NBA. I have high hopes for him and am extremely happy that he is on our team.

However the main reason I will vote no is that Bledsoe must go if we make this trade. That is unless there is some other magical move happening with him.

[starbosa10]

it all comes down to cost

[carey]

Yes, knowing Irving would absolute extend is the key to this whole thing.

[Desertfox]

Irving is a rich man's Knight, shoot-first all-star guard who doesn't play defense, been there done that, didn't work out too well...

I bet the hold up on any deal is that rookies who can't be traded yet are involved. I'd say we will see a deal done on the 4th or soon after.

[bwoolf2]

Final Offer

Bledsoe

Miami 2018 1st

Suns 2019 1st top 5 protected or defaults to 2020 unprotected if in top 5

[JJ13]

Final Offer

Bledsoe

Miami 2018 1st

Suns 2019 1st top 5 protected or defaults to 2020 unprotected if in top 5

I'd rather include Warren than any of our future picks - he's going to get paid next summer

[Waylay13]

1 - Melo isn't going to Cleveland I think he's come out again and said "Houston or nobody'.
2 - We already have so many rookies, we don't need two more picks next year and another rookie in Ntilikina.
3 - Kyrie fits our #timeline.

You know one of the more amazing things about rookies? After a season they are no longer rookies. So right now we have Jackson, Reed and Peters (who we havent signed). Now since having rookie and players on their rookie salary ensure that we are keeping good cost control you might rethink your statement before we give away a 1st over all pick.

Who said anything about giving a 1st overall pick? I didn't know we had one of those to give away? I said I'd trade a protected PHX pick with the idea of protection around 1-5.

Am I miss understanding what you said here? We have 2 1st round draft picks next year. Miami's is top 7 protected but if we have too many rookies and trade our pick and we continue to not make the playoffs (which is extremely likely) we could get one of the top picks in the draft. What if we have two picks and we can roll them together and move up a spot of two to get the player that we really want? Since the current CBA makes it hard to pull players away from their original teams draft picks have never had as much value as they do now.

[Bjorpa]

For the record I wasn't in favor of these moves, but it's a hell of a lot better than packaging Bledsoe with either JJ or the Suns own pick for Irving.

This is the part I don't understand.

- You pass on Butler because of price, and stay out of free agent marked.
- You draft a player many see as the second best project in the draft.
- You hold a press conference preaching patience.
- You then trade for Kyrie, who is a much worse fit than Butler, for a much better package than Chicago got?

Insanity, if true.

Well, the truth is Bledsoe is in no-man's land when it comes to Phoenix. He is just out of the age range of our core. Thus, trading for a PG is somewhat more ideal since it replaces Bledsoe. Butler is 27, while Kyrie is 25, and fits a bit better in a Bledsoe-centric deal. That said, I am not sure it is more than Butler got to begin with. I would personally much rather have Lavine and Lauri (plus Dunn) as a rebuilding team over Bledsoe, Chriss, and the Miami pick. Lavine really turned the corner last year. If you believe he will come back from his ACL fine (which is typical in today's sports world), he is the most valuable person in either Chicago or Cleveland's return, and Lauri is also very well thought of.

If you mean trading Jackson--then I agree. That would be more than either team got and I wouldn't be happy with that move. That said, I don't believe Jackson is going.

I don't disagree, but I'm not sure we offered Chicago the same package we are supposedly offering now. And Chicago for a pick swap, so it is esentially moving up 9 slots in the draft to get Lauri.

I'm not very high on Chriss, but I'm not to sure Lavine will be a star either.

But I get your point. They want to rebuild. Bledsoe does not help om that regard.

Much like Irving does not help is, when paired with Booker.