2021-22 Season Discussion and Speculation

[bigfoot]

I don't think we should run our offense through our C, but that doesn't mean they couldn't play a big part. Duncan was basically a C though, and with him and Robinson they won 2. But this hasn't really happened since the days of Kareem...and you could argue the early days, outside of when Jordan was retired and Hakeem won a couple and Robinson/Duncan in 99 after Jordan retired again. But the Bucks play best with Giannis at C.

What recent team has won a chip running their offense through a center? What recent team has won a chip with a dominant defensive center?

Milwaukee's best lineup by far is with Giannis at C, though against the Suns they had to make adjustments after Ayton dominated in game 1 with 22/19 on 80% shooting.

On the occasions Mike Budenholzer has seen fit to move Giannis Antetokounmpo to center, the Bucks have been practically unbeatable.

Such lineups have scored 116.5 points per 100 possessions, according to Cleaning the Glass. They've been even better defensively. The Bucks allow the fewest points per 100 possessions in the NBA. The Bucks allow the fewest points per 100 possessions in the NBA, only 102.3 in total. With Antetokounmpo at center, that number tumbles to 94.8.

To echo - Bigfoot, I don't know how you can argue that Giannis doesn't fit your requirements when he played the majority of Milwaukee's center minutes. Previous year for the Lakers it was AD and Dwight playing those minutes. Previous year the Raptors used Gasol and Ibaka.

Every other champion over the last decade was a team led by Lebron or Curry, or anchored by Duncan. In 2011, the Mavs won with Tyson Chandler playing 32 MPG and Brendan Haywood playing 15 MPG in the playoffs. Kobe got the two championships before that with teams anchored by Andrew Bynum, who was very briefly great. Before that going all the way back to Jordan, the rings all belonged to Duncan and Shaq, the two exceptions the Celtics championship where they played Perk and Garnett at center and the 2004 Pistons with Ben and Rasheed Wallace at center.

If your point is that we wouldn't need Deandre if we'd drafted Luka, whose talent is comparable to Lebron's and Curry's, then your point is well taken. But aside from that, the idea that you can just abandon the center position is baseless. It's true if you have Curry or Lebron on your roster. But if you would trade Duncan for pieces because "you don't need a center in today's game," you're a fool. Talent wins championships, whether it's with exceptional individual talent or collectively with a team. ESPECIALLY if you're going the collective route, you need all your bases covered, because a weakness anywhere will keep you from the promised land.

Ship Deandre off for an ok center and you're left with an ok team, no matter who else you put out there. Because hot take time: CP3 and Booker aren't *that* good. We need strength across the board if we're going to win. And we're simply not going to do better than Deandre Ayton. How good he turns out to be is the essential, critical question upon which this team's future ultimately depends, regardless of what else we do.

If you have noticed (please go read all the posts) I have never once mentioned that we should trade Ayton in any post. I just said he's not capable of running the offense and he's not worthy of a max contract. None of those centers mentioned had the offense run through them. Dirk ran it for Chandler, Kobe ran it for Bynum, Lebron did for AD. Ayton has nowhere near the offensive talent of either AD or Giannis who are both power forwards for the majority of their minutes.

The fact is, Lebron, Curry, Kobe, Kwahi, and Giannis have been most responsible for leading their respecitve offenses to championships over the past 10 years. All of them have far, far, far superior offensive skills than Ayton. Embiid and Towns who are skilled offensively have been unable to crack the nut and make it to the finals. Sadly, many posters have fooled themselves into believing Ayton will become one of these max-contract deserving centers because well ... he has potential. Everything the kid has done on/off the court has shown otherwise including his suspension.

Fine if you want to tie your wagon to DA as the Suns' messiah. I just watch him play and he lacks true passion and instincts for the game. Just calling it like I see it.

[Years90Suns]

Gerald Bourguet (@GeraldBourguet) Tweeted:
Asked Monty about the Suns’ uncharacteristic lapses in their defensive communication, and he brought up an interesting point about conditioning playing a role in that. Said they’ll be getting in “Suns shape” with only 2 games this week https://t.co/JvDHi2BxBY

Read on Twitter

?s=20

I was already beginning about this. Actually, since day 1.

Lakers: two games separated by two days and both ar home. Easy start so they can get in shape little by little.
Suns: three games in two days, Two of them on the road.

[bwgood77]

I don't think we should run our offense through our C, but that doesn't mean they couldn't play a big part. Duncan was basically a C though, and with him and Robinson they won 2. But this hasn't really happened since the days of Kareem...and you could argue the early days, outside of when Jordan was retired and Hakeem won a couple and Robinson/Duncan in 99 after Jordan retired again. But the Bucks play best with Giannis at C.



Milwaukee's best lineup by far is with Giannis at C, though against the Suns they had to make adjustments after Ayton dominated in game 1 with 22/19 on 80% shooting.

To echo - Bigfoot, I don't know how you can argue that Giannis doesn't fit your requirements when he played the majority of Milwaukee's center minutes. Previous year for the Lakers it was AD and Dwight playing those minutes. Previous year the Raptors used Gasol and Ibaka.

Every other champion over the last decade was a team led by Lebron or Curry, or anchored by Duncan. In 2011, the Mavs won with Tyson Chandler playing 32 MPG and Brendan Haywood playing 15 MPG in the playoffs. Kobe got the two championships before that with teams anchored by Andrew Bynum, who was very briefly great. Before that going all the way back to Jordan, the rings all belonged to Duncan and Shaq, the two exceptions the Celtics championship where they played Perk and Garnett at center and the 2004 Pistons with Ben and Rasheed Wallace at center.

If your point is that we wouldn't need Deandre if we'd drafted Luka, whose talent is comparable to Lebron's and Curry's, then your point is well taken. But aside from that, the idea that you can just abandon the center position is baseless. It's true if you have Curry or Lebron on your roster. But if you would trade Duncan for pieces because "you don't need a center in today's game," you're a fool. Talent wins championships, whether it's with exceptional individual talent or collectively with a team. ESPECIALLY if you're going the collective route, you need all your bases covered, because a weakness anywhere will keep you from the promised land.

Ship Deandre off for an ok center and you're left with an ok team, no matter who else you put out there. Because hot take time: CP3 and Booker aren't *that* good. We need strength across the board if we're going to win. And we're simply not going to do better than Deandre Ayton. How good he turns out to be is the essential, critical question upon which this team's future ultimately depends, regardless of what else we do.

If you have noticed (please go read all the posts) I have never once mentioned that we should trade Ayton in any post. I just said he's not capable of running the offense and he's not worthy of a max contract. None of those centers mentioned had the offense run through them. Dirk ran it for Chandler, Kobe ran it for Bynum, Lebron did for AD. Ayton has nowhere near the offensive talent of either AD or Giannis who are both power forwards for the majority of their minutes.

The fact is, Lebron, Curry, Kobe, Kwahi, and Giannis have been most responsible for leading their respecitve offenses to championships over the past 10 years. All of them have far, far, far superior offensive skills than Ayton. Embiid and Towns who are skilled offensively have been unable to crack the nut and make it to the finals. Sadly, many posters have fooled themselves into believing Ayton will become one of these max-contract deserving centers because well ... he has potential. Everything the kid has done on/off the court has shown otherwise including his suspension.

Fine if you want to tie your wagon to DA as the Suns' messiah. I just watch him play and he lacks true passion and instincts for the game. Just calling it like I see it.

I know some want a lot more offense from him. I would like him to get more shots, but don't think he needs to have the most offense running through him. No matter what, Book will take the most shots. After that I'm fine with an even distribution between Bridges and Ayton..or even a bit more from Bridges given his elite efficiency.

Ayton does have nice passing skills too, so post Paul, running some of the offense through him from a passing standpoint isn't a bad idea...like many teams do with their Cs (Bam, Sabonis, etc as well as of course Jokic). I know many HATE him passing out but there will almost ALWAYS be a guy open when he gets the ball due to a double team...so we can get a wide open shot.

But the most important thing is his defense.

As for paying him, it depends on his market value, but as Vecenie stated, with the new tv deal, even a max would be considered a bargain in 3 years to have such a defensive anchor who can rebound, screen, contest shots and score efficiently on a contract that is 20% of the cap.

Ideally we get him for $25-$27.5 million after watching him continue to improve this year, though in the playoffs last year he played well enough to be worth it then.

So it depends on whether you care about deep playoff runs or just whether or not you personally think he has enough offense for a max, and hate his occasional lower pts game due to lack of shots...or lower rebound game despite showing the last few seasons he will be among the top of the league in rebounding....and now he is boxing out much better as well.

No one views him as a "messiah" but an important part at the age of 22 of a team that made a finals run the first time most of them even made the playoffs.

You may not want to trade him or overpay him but it likely has to be one or the other, so break up a team that had that run or pay him more than you'd like when we will likely have a big cap spike in 3 years anyway as far more revenue comes in the league.

[bigfoot]

To echo - Bigfoot, I don't know how you can argue that Giannis doesn't fit your requirements when he played the majority of Milwaukee's center minutes. Previous year for the Lakers it was AD and Dwight playing those minutes. Previous year the Raptors used Gasol and Ibaka.

Every other champion over the last decade was a team led by Lebron or Curry, or anchored by Duncan. In 2011, the Mavs won with Tyson Chandler playing 32 MPG and Brendan Haywood playing 15 MPG in the playoffs. Kobe got the two championships before that with teams anchored by Andrew Bynum, who was very briefly great. Before that going all the way back to Jordan, the rings all belonged to Duncan and Shaq, the two exceptions the Celtics championship where they played Perk and Garnett at center and the 2004 Pistons with Ben and Rasheed Wallace at center.

If your point is that we wouldn't need Deandre if we'd drafted Luka, whose talent is comparable to Lebron's and Curry's, then your point is well taken. But aside from that, the idea that you can just abandon the center position is baseless. It's true if you have Curry or Lebron on your roster. But if you would trade Duncan for pieces because "you don't need a center in today's game," you're a fool. Talent wins championships, whether it's with exceptional individual talent or collectively with a team. ESPECIALLY if you're going the collective route, you need all your bases covered, because a weakness anywhere will keep you from the promised land.

Ship Deandre off for an ok center and you're left with an ok team, no matter who else you put out there. Because hot take time: CP3 and Booker aren't *that* good. We need strength across the board if we're going to win. And we're simply not going to do better than Deandre Ayton. How good he turns out to be is the essential, critical question upon which this team's future ultimately depends, regardless of what else we do.

If you have noticed (please go read all the posts) I have never once mentioned that we should trade Ayton in any post. I just said he's not capable of running the offense and he's not worthy of a max contract. None of those centers mentioned had the offense run through them. Dirk ran it for Chandler, Kobe ran it for Bynum, Lebron did for AD. Ayton has nowhere near the offensive talent of either AD or Giannis who are both power forwards for the majority of their minutes.

The fact is, Lebron, Curry, Kobe, Kwahi, and Giannis have been most responsible for leading their respecitve offenses to championships over the past 10 years. All of them have far, far, far superior offensive skills than Ayton. Embiid and Towns who are skilled offensively have been unable to crack the nut and make it to the finals. Sadly, many posters have fooled themselves into believing Ayton will become one of these max-contract deserving centers because well ... he has potential. Everything the kid has done on/off the court has shown otherwise including his suspension.

Fine if you want to tie your wagon to DA as the Suns' messiah. I just watch him play and he lacks true passion and instincts for the game. Just calling it like I see it.

I know some want a lot more offense from him. I would like him to get more shots, but don't think he needs to have the most offense running through him. No matter what, Book will take the most shots. After that I'm fine with an even distribution between Bridges and Ayton..or even a bit more from Bridges given his elite efficiency.

Ayton does have nice passing skills too, so post Paul, running some of the offense through him from a passing standpoint isn't a bad idea...like many teams do with their Cs (Bam, Sabonis, etc as well as of course Jokic). I know many HATE him passing out but there will almost ALWAYS be a guy open when he gets the ball due to a double team...so we can get a wide open shot.

But the most important thing is his defense.

As for paying him, it depends on his market value, but as Vecenie stated, with the new tv deal, even a max would be considered a bargain in 3 years to have such a defensive anchor who can rebound, screen, contest shots and score efficiently on a contract that is 20% of the cap.

Ideally we get him for $25-$27.5 million after watching him continue to improve this year, though in the playoffs last year he played well enough to be worth it then.

So it depends on whether you care about deep playoff runs or just whether or not you personally think he has enough offense for a max, and hate his occasional lower pts game due to lack of shots...or lower rebound game despite showing the last few seasons he will be among the top of the league in rebounding....and now he is boxing out much better as well.

No one views him as a "messiah" but an important part at the age of 22 of a team that made a finals run the first time most of them even made the playoffs.

You may not want to trade him or overpay him but it likely has to be one or the other, so break up a team that had that run or pay him more than you'd like when we will likely have a big cap spike in 3 years anyway as far more revenue comes in the league.

Ayton needs to rebound the ball and play defense as he did in the playoffs. Frankly, he's been pathetic in two of the three games this season. Honestly, can you be happy with a 6 rebound and 3 rebound game from him? I was happy with his 8 point/15 rebound performance against the Lakers. He was engaged on defense and took AD seriously. Who cares about his points? People clamouring for Ayton to get more shots or run the offense is absurd. The problem is, he is back to lackadaisical play we have seen over the course of three seasons ... disengaged, walking through the motions, uninterested, impassionate ... whatever you want to call it.

[lilfishi22]

I guess that's why Jones/Sarver were against giving him the max since these max deals are tied to the cap. So even if the cap goes to $200m, it's still going to be 25-30% of that figure. Mikal's deal will absolutely be a bargain since he's on $22.5m which is roughly 20% of the salary cap so with a big rise in the salary cap, that amount would be approaching 10% of the cap. A max deal will always be 25-30% of the cap, no matter how big of a jump the cap sees.

For me, the biggest factor for paying him is his playability deep in the playoffs. He hasn't shown to be a reliable scorer but he is a very reliable and versatile defender, rebounder and scores with high efficiency when he does score. Towards the end he wasn't as efficient or as impactful but this was also his first playoff run at 22 and we put A LOT on his shoulders defensively and I think that gets underappreciated. I do think he has an avenue to become a secondary scorer with elite defense but it's not going to be part of our offense as long as we have a CP3 led system. With CP3 it's going to be dunks, it's going to be alley oops and it's pick and pops.

[bwgood77]

If you have noticed (please go read all the posts) I have never once mentioned that we should trade Ayton in any post. I just said he's not capable of running the offense and he's not worthy of a max contract. None of those centers mentioned had the offense run through them. Dirk ran it for Chandler, Kobe ran it for Bynum, Lebron did for AD. Ayton has nowhere near the offensive talent of either AD or Giannis who are both power forwards for the majority of their minutes.

The fact is, Lebron, Curry, Kobe, Kwahi, and Giannis have been most responsible for leading their respecitve offenses to championships over the past 10 years. All of them have far, far, far superior offensive skills than Ayton. Embiid and Towns who are skilled offensively have been unable to crack the nut and make it to the finals. Sadly, many posters have fooled themselves into believing Ayton will become one of these max-contract deserving centers because well ... he has potential. Everything the kid has done on/off the court has shown otherwise including his suspension.

Fine if you want to tie your wagon to DA as the Suns' messiah. I just watch him play and he lacks true passion and instincts for the game. Just calling it like I see it.

I know some want a lot more offense from him. I would like him to get more shots, but don't think he needs to have the most offense running through him. No matter what, Book will take the most shots. After that I'm fine with an even distribution between Bridges and Ayton..or even a bit more from Bridges given his elite efficiency.

Ayton does have nice passing skills too, so post Paul, running some of the offense through him from a passing standpoint isn't a bad idea...like many teams do with their Cs (Bam, Sabonis, etc as well as of course Jokic). I know many HATE him passing out but there will almost ALWAYS be a guy open when he gets the ball due to a double team...so we can get a wide open shot.

But the most important thing is his defense.

As for paying him, it depends on his market value, but as Vecenie stated, with the new tv deal, even a max would be considered a bargain in 3 years to have such a defensive anchor who can rebound, screen, contest shots and score efficiently on a contract that is 20% of the cap.

Ideally we get him for $25-$27.5 million after watching him continue to improve this year, though in the playoffs last year he played well enough to be worth it then.

So it depends on whether you care about deep playoff runs or just whether or not you personally think he has enough offense for a max, and hate his occasional lower pts game due to lack of shots...or lower rebound game despite showing the last few seasons he will be among the top of the league in rebounding....and now he is boxing out much better as well.

No one views him as a "messiah" but an important part at the age of 22 of a team that made a finals run the first time most of them even made the playoffs.

You may not want to trade him or overpay him but it likely has to be one or the other, so break up a team that had that run or pay him more than you'd like when we will likely have a big cap spike in 3 years anyway as far more revenue comes in the league.

Ayton needs to rebound the ball and play defense as he did in the playoffs. Frankly, he's been pathetic in two of the three games this season. Honestly, can you be happy with a 6 rebound and 3 rebound game from him? I was happy with his 8 point/15 rebound performance against the Lakers. He was engaged on defense and took AD seriously. Who cares about his points? People clamouring for Ayton to get more shots or run the offense is absurd. The problem is, he is back to lackadaisical play we have seen over the course of three seasons ... disengaged, walking through the motions, uninterested, impassionate ... whatever you want to call it.

I didn't just look at the box scores though and noticed him boxing out Nurkic and Jokic on most defensive rebound opportunities while someone else grabbed the rebounds...the Nuggets outrebounded us by 1 despite us shooting much worse giving them more defensive rebounding opportunities. Our starters didn't even play that much of the game against Portland...barely more than half of it. Portland's bench got like 6 offensive boards against ours. Some guy named Greg Brown III got 2 in six minutes, and Nassir Little got 3. We missed more shots too giving them more d-rebounding opportunities.

But the way you complain about $12 million Ayton I don't understand about the $30 million players. Paul had 8 turnovers in the first two games and Booker had 7. Book also shot 20% on 15 shots in the first one and started out the Portland one shooting poorly before getting hot when the game was already out of hand.

The only guy playing well for the most part is Bridges.

[bwgood77]

I guess that's why Jones/Sarver were against giving him the max since these max deals are tied to the cap. So even if the cap goes to $200m, it's still going to be 25-30% of that figure. Mikal's deal will absolutely be a bargain since he's on $22.5m which is roughly 20% of the salary cap so with a big rise in the salary cap, that amount would be approaching 10% of the cap. A max deal will always be 25-30% of the cap, no matter how big of a jump the cap sees.

For me, the biggest factor for paying him is his playability deep in the playoffs. He hasn't shown to be a reliable scorer but he is a very reliable and versatile defender, rebounder and scores with high efficiency when he does score. Towards the end he wasn't as efficient or as impactful but this was also his first playoff run at 22 and we put A LOT on his shoulders defensively and I think that gets underappreciated. I do think he has an avenue to become a secondary scorer with elite defense but it's not going to be part of our offense as long as we have a CP3 led system. With CP3 it's going to be dunks, it's going to be alley oops and it's pick and pops.

No, apparently the amounts are concrete based on an average estimate increase. I tweeted and posted about how Booker's salary would be less since the cap didn't increase during COVID and everyone said "no, the contract is written and the dollar amount stays the same relative of the cap. This is why Vecenie said with a cap spike Ayton's 25% deal would reduce to maybe 20% of the cap which would be a deal, as opposed to a 3 year deal where he then has 7 years experience making him eligible for 30% at the same time the new tv deal comes in....and 30% of $160 million is $48 million. Not that he'd get that much but it was why some other cap experts from teams and GMs around the league found it odd we mentioned we would have been open to a 3 year max. It's just strange even without that. If you are willing to max a guy, you like him so you should theoretically want to lock him up as long as possible.

[WeekapaugGroove]

Bezos. I want a HUGE Suns Amazon store.

That would be awesome!
Being able to get all the latest suns gear, etc on my prime account. Plus luxury tax for him would be an absolute joke proposition.

Bumping this on the eve of whatever ESPN is supposed to have. There's no way it'd be Bezos or Musk.

Larry Ellison of Oracle has been trying to buy an NBA team for years now. He tried (and failed) with Houston, New Orleans and Golden State. I'd bet that's who gets 1st swing if this actually happens.

He's also worth roughly 130 Billion dollars.....slightly more than Booby Sarver.

Guarantee that's probably our new guy if the league forces Sarver to sell.

Ellison would be great!

To anyone worried about a non local owner, don't. Most aren't these days and the suns just got an arena renovation and new lease. They aren't going anywhere. Teams get moved when the league is unable exort public money for an arena but that's already happened here. It's a **** system but is what it is.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

[Slim Charless]

I know some want a lot more offense from him. I would like him to get more shots, but don't think he needs to have the most offense running through him. No matter what, Book will take the most shots. After that I'm fine with an even distribution between Bridges and Ayton..or even a bit more from Bridges given his elite efficiency.

Ayton does have nice passing skills too, so post Paul, running some of the offense through him from a passing standpoint isn't a bad idea...like many teams do with their Cs (Bam, Sabonis, etc as well as of course Jokic). I know many HATE him passing out but there will almost ALWAYS be a guy open when he gets the ball due to a double team...so we can get a wide open shot.

But the most important thing is his defense.

As for paying him, it depends on his market value, but as Vecenie stated, with the new tv deal, even a max would be considered a bargain in 3 years to have such a defensive anchor who can rebound, screen, contest shots and score efficiently on a contract that is 20% of the cap.

Ideally we get him for $25-$27.5 million after watching him continue to improve this year, though in the playoffs last year he played well enough to be worth it then.

So it depends on whether you care about deep playoff runs or just whether or not you personally think he has enough offense for a max, and hate his occasional lower pts game due to lack of shots...or lower rebound game despite showing the last few seasons he will be among the top of the league in rebounding....and now he is boxing out much better as well.

No one views him as a "messiah" but an important part at the age of 22 of a team that made a finals run the first time most of them even made the playoffs.

You may not want to trade him or overpay him but it likely has to be one or the other, so break up a team that had that run or pay him more than you'd like when we will likely have a big cap spike in 3 years anyway as far more revenue comes in the league.

Ayton needs to rebound the ball and play defense as he did in the playoffs. Frankly, he's been pathetic in two of the three games this season. Honestly, can you be happy with a 6 rebound and 3 rebound game from him? I was happy with his 8 point/15 rebound performance against the Lakers. He was engaged on defense and took AD seriously. Who cares about his points? People clamouring for Ayton to get more shots or run the offense is absurd. The problem is, he is back to lackadaisical play we have seen over the course of three seasons ... disengaged, walking through the motions, uninterested, impassionate ... whatever you want to call it.

I didn't just look at the box scores though and noticed him boxing out Nurkic and Jokic on most defensive rebound opportunities while someone else grabbed the rebounds...the Nuggets outrebounded us by 1 despite us shooting much worse giving them more defensive rebounding opportunities. Our starters didn't even play that much of the game against Portland...barely more than half of it. Portland's bench got like 6 offensive boards against ours. Some guy named Greg Brown III got 2 in six minutes, and Nassir Little got 3. We missed more shots too giving them more d-rebounding opportunities.

But the way you complain about $12 million Ayton I don't understand about the $30 million players. Paul had 8 turnovers in the first two games and Booker had 7. Book also shot 20% on 15 shots in the first one and started out the Portland one shooting poorly before getting hot when the game was already out of hand.

The only guy playing well for the most part is Bridges.

I wish Booker could escape turnovers via double teams the way he escapes criticism on this board. He's been subpar this young season and has been off ever since he got his face smacked around in the western finals.

[lilfishi22]

I guess that's why Jones/Sarver were against giving him the max since these max deals are tied to the cap. So even if the cap goes to $200m, it's still going to be 25-30% of that figure. Mikal's deal will absolutely be a bargain since he's on $22.5m which is roughly 20% of the salary cap so with a big rise in the salary cap, that amount would be approaching 10% of the cap. A max deal will always be 25-30% of the cap, no matter how big of a jump the cap sees.

For me, the biggest factor for paying him is his playability deep in the playoffs. He hasn't shown to be a reliable scorer but he is a very reliable and versatile defender, rebounder and scores with high efficiency when he does score. Towards the end he wasn't as efficient or as impactful but this was also his first playoff run at 22 and we put A LOT on his shoulders defensively and I think that gets underappreciated. I do think he has an avenue to become a secondary scorer with elite defense but it's not going to be part of our offense as long as we have a CP3 led system. With CP3 it's going to be dunks, it's going to be alley oops and it's pick and pops.

No, apparently the amounts are concrete based on an average estimate increase. I tweeted and posted about how Booker's salary would be less since the cap didn't increase during COVID and everyone said "no, the contract is written and the dollar amount stays the same relative of the cap. This is why Vecenie said with a cap spike Ayton's 25% deal would reduce to maybe 20% of the cap which would be a deal, as opposed to a 3 year deal where he then has 7 years experience making him eligible for 30% at the same time the new tv deal comes in....and 30% of $160 million is $48 million. Not that he'd get that much but it was why some other cap experts from teams and GMs around the league found it odd we mentioned we would have been open to a 3 year max. It's just strange even without that. If you are willing to max a guy, you like him so you should theoretically want to lock him up as long as possible.

I did some calcs and I think it's based on projections and then averaged out. So the 2023-2024 salary cap is projected to be about $125m which would be Booker's last year of the deal. 25% of the $125m is $31.25m which is pretty close to the $31.6m average annual salary Booker is on. So they take that approx $31m salary and put in the 8% yearly raises to work out the salary for each season.

But if that is the case then the project salary cap should already have included the estimated increase from the gambling money in 2025 (or whenever that is) so it's never going to drop to 20% of the cap. The only way it's possible is if the salary isn't tied to the cap but rather the non-designated max that is just based on raises. Unless they haven't estimated the raise yet with the future projections

[RaisingArizona]

I'm dismayed by this talk about trading Ayton. Do any of you really think trading Ayton would make us a better team? I find the idea laughable. Our defense would fall apart. We'd get crushed on the boards. The upside potential of this team would be crippled.

Y'all are planning a path to certain destruction: I guess, for the fun of it? Fortunately, I doubt anyone in this organization is so arrogant to think such ideas are worth entertaining. Ayton's a cornerstone of this franchise and he isn't going anywhere. If he goes, it'll only be a couple years before Mikal Bridges is carrying this franchise to 25 wins a year.

It's Realgm. Not much else to talk about between games.

[Slim Charless]

That would be awesome!
Being able to get all the latest suns gear, etc on my prime account. Plus luxury tax for him would be an absolute joke proposition.

Bumping this on the eve of whatever ESPN is supposed to have. There's no way it'd be Bezos or Musk.

Larry Ellison of Oracle has been trying to buy an NBA team for years now. He tried (and failed) with Houston, New Orleans and Golden State. I'd bet that's who gets 1st swing if this actually happens.

He's also worth roughly 130 Billion dollars.....slightly more than Booby Sarver.

Guarantee that's probably our new guy if the league forces Sarver to sell.

Ellison would be great!

To anyone worried about a non local owner, don't. Most aren't these days and the suns just got an arena renovation and new lease. They aren't going anywhere. Teams get moved when the league is unable exort public money for an arena but that's already happened here. It's a **** system but is what it is.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

The smart move would be have Ellison buy and allow Barkley to get part ownership. Doesn't even have to be a lot, just something to get in everyone's good graces and to help wash the stink of Sarver out of the building.

[Ghost of Kleine]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2949712-10-realistic-predictions-for-2022-nba-trade-deadline.amp.html

I like two hypotheticals in here:
1- OKC possibly buying out Favors.
2- Raptors become sellers at the deadline.

Getting either Favors or Boucher would be really solid for us if possible.

[bwgood77]

I guess that's why Jones/Sarver were against giving him the max since these max deals are tied to the cap. So even if the cap goes to $200m, it's still going to be 25-30% of that figure. Mikal's deal will absolutely be a bargain since he's on $22.5m which is roughly 20% of the salary cap so with a big rise in the salary cap, that amount would be approaching 10% of the cap. A max deal will always be 25-30% of the cap, no matter how big of a jump the cap sees.

For me, the biggest factor for paying him is his playability deep in the playoffs. He hasn't shown to be a reliable scorer but he is a very reliable and versatile defender, rebounder and scores with high efficiency when he does score. Towards the end he wasn't as efficient or as impactful but this was also his first playoff run at 22 and we put A LOT on his shoulders defensively and I think that gets underappreciated. I do think he has an avenue to become a secondary scorer with elite defense but it's not going to be part of our offense as long as we have a CP3 led system. With CP3 it's going to be dunks, it's going to be alley oops and it's pick and pops.

No, apparently the amounts are concrete based on an average estimate increase. I tweeted and posted about how Booker's salary would be less since the cap didn't increase during COVID and everyone said "no, the contract is written and the dollar amount stays the same relative of the cap. This is why Vecenie said with a cap spike Ayton's 25% deal would reduce to maybe 20% of the cap which would be a deal, as opposed to a 3 year deal where he then has 7 years experience making him eligible for 30% at the same time the new tv deal comes in....and 30% of $160 million is $48 million. Not that he'd get that much but it was why some other cap experts from teams and GMs around the league found it odd we mentioned we would have been open to a 3 year max. It's just strange even without that. If you are willing to max a guy, you like him so you should theoretically want to lock him up as long as possible.

I did some calcs and I think it's based on projections and then averaged out. So the 2023-2024 salary cap is projected to be about $125m which would be Booker's last year of the deal. 25% of the $125m is $31.25m which is pretty close to the $31.6m average annual salary Booker is on. So they take that approx $31m salary and put in the 8% yearly raises to work out the salary for each season.

But if that is the case then the project salary cap should already have included the estimated increase from the gambling money in 2025 (or whenever that is) so it's never going to drop to 20% of the cap. The only way it's possible is if the salary isn't tied to the cap but rather the non-designated max that is just based on raises. Unless they haven't estimated the raise yet with the future projections

They haven't estimated it. They come up with a 25% amount based on the base year's projected cap which is the very next year (or in case of an extension, just over a year) and then give the 8% raises.

[bwoolf2]

Man watching Hartenstein for the Clippers really passes me off I really wanted him, that guy is underrated big time

[bwoolf2]

Shamet or Payne? Those are the only two other new contracts. We've also only played 3 games and Payne only 2. I can understand Shamet as he is paid a lot of what he does. Ayton's raw stats are not great but he's played solid D so far and has been worth the $12 million he's making this year.

Well DA is the 14th highest-paid center in the league right now. For all centers he is 30th in points, 22nd in rebounds, 24th in assists, 31st in blocks, 20th in FG%, 42nd in FG%, 31st in FT attempts, 37th in FT percentage, 17th in steals, and 50th in true shooting percentage. He has the 9th worst defensive rating for all centers and 6th worst defensive win share. He hasn't played well on either end of the court. He's certainly not earning his paycheck under his current contract and thank goodness James Jones or Sarver didn't pay him a 5-year maximum.

Two words. Sample size.

Plus, you are probably looking at crappy b-ref counting stats where Drtg depends on how many points the team gives up. He's played well on defense against who he has played. He boxed out Nurkic well on defensive boards and our team got most of the missed shot rebounds. He rebounded against the big Lakers when that wouldn't work. We have a bigger body of work from last year where he was near the top in many categories outside of points. His efficiency will likely drop because he is trying more 3s, but he was highly efficient last year and provided great defense in the playoffs against some top 10 players. He couldn't stop everyone but for a 22 year old he did a damn good job. With a guy like him you are talking upside.

But I didn't want to give him a max either. Negotiating is fine.

I mean where do our real max or near max guys rank in all those against ALL players in their categories, since you obviously used non qualifying guys (like guys who have taken one shot)? I imagine they rank about the same in DRTG, efficiency, steals, TS%, rebounds, blocks. Take a look at Booker against all SGs and see where he comes out. Paul too...probably a little better than Book but if we are talking where they rank against everyone after 3 games and comparing that to salary, try it for them.

No, don't, because after 3 games it's pointless. You just wasted a lot of time.

Well except the small sample size is the playoff run, this is pretty close to what he has been for most of the regular season for 1st 3 years.

[bwgood77]

Well DA is the 14th highest-paid center in the league right now. For all centers he is 30th in points, 22nd in rebounds, 24th in assists, 31st in blocks, 20th in FG%, 42nd in FG%, 31st in FT attempts, 37th in FT percentage, 17th in steals, and 50th in true shooting percentage. He has the 9th worst defensive rating for all centers and 6th worst defensive win share. He hasn't played well on either end of the court. He's certainly not earning his paycheck under his current contract and thank goodness James Jones or Sarver didn't pay him a 5-year maximum.

Two words. Sample size.

Plus, you are probably looking at crappy b-ref counting stats where Drtg depends on how many points the team gives up. He's played well on defense against who he has played. He boxed out Nurkic well on defensive boards and our team got most of the missed shot rebounds. He rebounded against the big Lakers when that wouldn't work. We have a bigger body of work from last year where he was near the top in many categories outside of points. His efficiency will likely drop because he is trying more 3s, but he was highly efficient last year and provided great defense in the playoffs against some top 10 players. He couldn't stop everyone but for a 22 year old he did a damn good job. With a guy like him you are talking upside.

But I didn't want to give him a max either. Negotiating is fine.

I mean where do our real max or near max guys rank in all those against ALL players in their categories, since you obviously used non qualifying guys (like guys who have taken one shot)? I imagine they rank about the same in DRTG, efficiency, steals, TS%, rebounds, blocks. Take a look at Booker against all SGs and see where he comes out. Paul too...probably a little better than Book but if we are talking where they rank against everyone after 3 games and comparing that to salary, try it for them.

No, don't, because after 3 games it's pointless. You just wasted a lot of time.

Well except the small sample size is the playoff run, this is pretty close to what he has been for most of the regular season for 1st 3 years.

His career averages are 16ppg, 10.6 rpg with a 59% FG% and over a 61% TS%. This includes his rookie year where he was a raw 1 year college guy.

He has improved tremendously in many areas, particularly in areas that don't show up in the traditional box score stats bigfoot goes by, but things like contesting shots (top 10 in contested 2s and 3s last year in entire NBA which shows his great switching ability to perimeter), top 5 in screen assists getting open shots for Book and Paul, 1 on 1 defense, help defense, boxing out, etc.

So a guy who averages over 16 ppg as a rookie and over 18 ppg as a 2nd year guy who's shots drop substantially last year because we add a major NBA offensive weapon, means he suddenly declined? People seem lower on him now than before, when he was just putting up 18 and 12 on worse efficiency and couldn't defend or do the little things nearly as well. I know people like the PPG but actual impact on lineups and wins and losses matters more to me and likely to the team which is why they didn't focus on his offense last year but more his defense. With a guy like Rubio he will score over 18 as more of a top option, but also a guy the D can focus a little more on since Rubio doesn't shoot well, but with Paul he drops from 2nd to more of a 3rd option last year along with Bridges.

The whole team has gotten off to a bad start so far.

[bwoolf2]

Two words. Sample size.

Plus, you are probably looking at crappy b-ref counting stats where Drtg depends on how many points the team gives up. He's played well on defense against who he has played. He boxed out Nurkic well on defensive boards and our team got most of the missed shot rebounds. He rebounded against the big Lakers when that wouldn't work. We have a bigger body of work from last year where he was near the top in many categories outside of points. His efficiency will likely drop because he is trying more 3s, but he was highly efficient last year and provided great defense in the playoffs against some top 10 players. He couldn't stop everyone but for a 22 year old he did a damn good job. With a guy like him you are talking upside.

But I didn't want to give him a max either. Negotiating is fine.

I mean where do our real max or near max guys rank in all those against ALL players in their categories, since you obviously used non qualifying guys (like guys who have taken one shot)? I imagine they rank about the same in DRTG, efficiency, steals, TS%, rebounds, blocks. Take a look at Booker against all SGs and see where he comes out. Paul too...probably a little better than Book but if we are talking where they rank against everyone after 3 games and comparing that to salary, try it for them.

No, don't, because after 3 games it's pointless. You just wasted a lot of time.

Well except the small sample size is the playoff run, this is pretty close to what he has been for most of the regular season for 1st 3 years.

His career averages are 16ppg, 10.6 rpg with a 59% FG% and over a 61% TS%. This includes his rookie year where he was a raw 1 year college guy.

He has improved tremendously in many areas, particularly in areas that don't show up in the traditional box score stats bigfoot goes by, but things like contesting shots (top 10 in contested 2s and 3s last year in entire NBA which shows his great switching ability to perimeter), top 5 in screen assists getting open shots for Book and Paul, 1 on 1 defense, help defense, boxing out, etc.

So a guy who averages over 16 ppg as a rookie and over 18 ppg as a 2nd year guy who's shots drop substantially last year because we add a major NBA offensive weapon, means he suddenly declined? People seem lower on him now than before, when he was just putting up 18 and 12 on worse efficiency and couldn't defend or do the little things nearly as well. I know people like the PPG but actual impact on lineups and wins and losses matters more to me and likely to the team which is why they didn't focus on his offense last year but more his defense. With a guy like Rubio he will score over 18 as more of a top option, but also a guy the D can focus a little more on since Rubio doesn't shoot well, but with Paul he drops from 2nd to more of a 3rd option last year along with Bridges.

The whole team has gotten off to a bad start so far.

I agree the team looks bad. I have been an Ayton fan and defended him consistently but he hasn't been a max player. He coasts through way too many games way too many nights to get a super max imo.

[bwoolf2]

Clips boat racing the Blazers like the Blazers boat raced us

[bwgood77]

Well except the small sample size is the playoff run, this is pretty close to what he has been for most of the regular season for 1st 3 years.

His career averages are 16ppg, 10.6 rpg with a 59% FG% and over a 61% TS%. This includes his rookie year where he was a raw 1 year college guy.

He has improved tremendously in many areas, particularly in areas that don't show up in the traditional box score stats bigfoot goes by, but things like contesting shots (top 10 in contested 2s and 3s last year in entire NBA which shows his great switching ability to perimeter), top 5 in screen assists getting open shots for Book and Paul, 1 on 1 defense, help defense, boxing out, etc.

So a guy who averages over 16 ppg as a rookie and over 18 ppg as a 2nd year guy who's shots drop substantially last year because we add a major NBA offensive weapon, means he suddenly declined? People seem lower on him now than before, when he was just putting up 18 and 12 on worse efficiency and couldn't defend or do the little things nearly as well. I know people like the PPG but actual impact on lineups and wins and losses matters more to me and likely to the team which is why they didn't focus on his offense last year but more his defense. With a guy like Rubio he will score over 18 as more of a top option, but also a guy the D can focus a little more on since Rubio doesn't shoot well, but with Paul he drops from 2nd to more of a 3rd option last year along with Bridges.

The whole team has gotten off to a bad start so far.

I agree the team looks bad. I have been an Ayton fan and defended him consistently but he hasn't been a max player. He coasts through way too many games way too many nights to get a super max imo.

I don't think he's a max player yet either. Whether or not he can get there I don't know. Likely not this season but I think within a couple of years when he begins to get closer to his prime I think there is a chance, but who knows about any player for sure.