Suns Trade Knight and Chriss for Anderson and Melton

[Ring_Wanted]

I hear you Pickle, but at some point you need to just cut your loses. Knight and Chriss where not a real part of the team anymore and we got something we can use, even if just apparently as marginal as what we sent out.

We are talking about getting, what, an extra second rounder? That's not going to keep me from moving on those two garbage players.

[ShelC]

We may have also needed to include Chriss to "sweeten" the deal. I get why the Rockets were probably enticed by him. They don't have a lot of young prospects on the roster that's build to win now. So he can probably help a bit now up front playing off Paul and Harden and still potentially develop in the future next to Capela. I don't see it happening, but they're the ones who need to believe it.

[Split T]

Chriss needed to be included to make the salaries match. We couldn't have done Anderson for Knight straight up

[Mori Chu]

I'll be really interested to see how Chriss does in Houston. A change of scenery could be good for him, and playing with a fast-paced offense and team like that could rejuvenate his career. But then again, deep down I think he's a bum who won't last in the NBA, so I kind of think he'll wash out there. We'll see.

[Ring_Wanted]

Honestly I just don't care at all. Won't bat an eye if Chriss or Knight have good or bad seasons. They could become allstars and I'd still count the trade as a win.

[In2ition]

This is a bit petty of me, but I hope they suck @$$.

[Superbone]

Honestly I just don't care at all. Won't bat an eye if Chriss or Knight have good or bad seasons. They could become allstars and I'd still count the trade as a win.

Maybe in an alternate universe. Chriss has small hands or something. Can't use that athleticism to dunk the ball without losing it 70 percent of the time.

[pickle]

I hear you Pickle, but at some point you need to just cut your loses. Knight and Chriss where not a real part of the team anymore and we got something we can use, even if just apparently as marginal as what we sent out.

We are talking about getting, what, an extra second rounder? That's not going to keep me from moving on those two garbage players.

I understand this line of thinking and I'm not upset that we moved on from Chriss and Knight. What my greater frustration is, we always seem to be the team taken advantage of in trades. I defended McD in another thread saying that given all the information available to us I cannot attribute to all the bad moves we've made in the past few years to him alone and isolate the Sarver effect, but in cases like this trade, I am guessing McD's effect is more profound.

I realize that I"m not the most articulate guy in the world, so let me use an analogy of sorts. When we've made trades in the past, on multiple occasions we were trying to fix a problem, so we had to take discounts on our merchandise. A good GM may have been able to get 90 cents on the dollar for these scenarios, and a bad one might only manage 80. In this regard I've actually been impressed with McD in both the Dragic and Markieff trades. The Bledsoe one was a little disappointing. In this Knight/Chriss deal, we were not under any specific time pressure and it seems like we should've been able to get 90 cents on the dollar, but I feel like we got 80 again. This is the highest level of the game, and the margins are important. This is true both on and off the court. Not only do the players have to do all they can to prepare themselves, the front office should also be held to those standards. Always losing trades and always not maximizing the values of our assets in trades puts us behind as a franchise, and that frustrates me tremendously. It's especially upsetting that we also don't seem to be good at evaluating talent -- I feel like we lucked into Booker.

Again, I don't know everything that's happened, and this is just conjecture, but it still frustrates me.

[pickle]

Honestly I just don't care at all. Won't bat an eye if Chriss or Knight have good or bad seasons. They could become allstars and I'd still count the trade as a win.

Maybe in an alternate universe. Chriss has small hands or something. Can't use that athleticism to dunk the ball without losing it 70 percent of the time.

Honestly I'm with RW on this. Once the trade is made, there's no point revisiting it using hindsight. The most I can ask of the team/front office is that they made the best decision with the information available at the time. In this case, we don't need Chriss and Knight and we turned them into potentially useful assets (though I wish more thought went into these scenarios before we gave Ariza that 15 mil contract), and that's good enough for me. Clearly we weren't going to benefit from the presences of these players, so I won't begrudge what they become in the hands of a better coaching staff/team environment.

[Indy]

I hear you Pickle, but at some point you need to just cut your loses. Knight and Chriss where not a real part of the team anymore and we got something we can use, even if just apparently as marginal as what we sent out.

We are talking about getting, what, an extra second rounder? That's not going to keep me from moving on those two garbage players.

I understand this line of thinking and I'm not upset that we moved on from Chriss and Knight. What my greater frustration is, we always seem to be the team taken advantage of in trades. I defended McD in another thread saying that given all the information available to us I cannot attribute to all the bad moves we've made in the past few years to him alone and isolate the Sarver effect, but in cases like this trade, I am guessing McD's effect is more profound.

I realize that I"m not the most articulate guy in the world, so let me use an analogy of sorts. When we've made trades in the past, on multiple occasions we were trying to fix a problem, so we had to take discounts on our merchandise. A good GM may have been able to get 90 cents on the dollar for these scenarios, and a bad one might only manage 80. In this regard I've actually been impressed with McD in both the Dragic and Markieff trades. The Bledsoe one was a little disappointing. In this Knight/Chriss deal, we were not under any specific time pressure and it seems like we should've been able to get 90 cents on the dollar, but I feel like we got 80 again. This is the highest level of the game, and the margins are important. This is true both on and off the court. Not only do the players have to do all they can to prepare themselves, the front office should also be held to those standards. Always losing trades and always not maximizing the values of our assets in trades puts us behind as a franchise, and that frustrates me tremendously. It's especially upsetting that we also don't seem to be good at evaluating talent -- I feel like we lucked into Booker.

Again, I don't know everything that's happened, and this is just conjecture, but it still frustrates me.

I would argue they were under pressure to get something done before training camp to give their new coach as much of a full roster as possible. And McD said recently that they couldn't see Ayton and Chriss playing together. And I really wonder how much they knew about BK's need for a scope/clean out.

[Split T]

I hear you Pickle, but at some point you need to just cut your loses. Knight and Chriss where not a real part of the team anymore and we got something we can use, even if just apparently as marginal as what we sent out.

We are talking about getting, what, an extra second rounder? That's not going to keep me from moving on those two garbage players.

I understand this line of thinking and I'm not upset that we moved on from Chriss and Knight. What my greater frustration is, we always seem to be the team taken advantage of in trades. I defended McD in another thread saying that given all the information available to us I cannot attribute to all the bad moves we've made in the past few years to him alone and isolate the Sarver effect, but in cases like this trade, I am guessing McD's effect is more profound.

I realize that I"m not the most articulate guy in the world, so let me use an analogy of sorts. When we've made trades in the past, on multiple occasions we were trying to fix a problem, so we had to take discounts on our merchandise. A good GM may have been able to get 90 cents on the dollar for these scenarios, and a bad one might only manage 80. In this regard I've actually been impressed with McD in both the Dragic and M******f trades. The Bledsoe one was a little disappointing. In this Knight/Chriss deal, we were not under any specific time pressure and it seems like we should've been able to get 90 cents on the dollar, but I feel like we got 80 again. This is the highest level of the game, and the margins are important. This is true both on and off the court. Not only do the players have to do all they can to prepare themselves, the front office should also be held to those standards. Always losing trades and always not maximizing the values of our assets in trades puts us behind as a franchise, and that frustrates me tremendously. It's especially upsetting that we also don't seem to be good at evaluating talent -- I feel like we lucked into Booker.

Again, I don't know everything that's happened, and this is just conjecture, but it still frustrates me.

I won't say this trade was a slam dunk in our favor. The Anderson contract makes me a little uneasy, even if we got the salary next year down to 15 million guaranteed. But I think we got the most interesting piece in the trade in De'Anthony Melton. He's an elite defensive prospect and if his shot is for real, he's the perfect fit next to Booker. I also find myself way more excited about what Ryan Anderson can do this year for us than what Knight or Chriss could have done.

I was maybe the biggest Chriss supporter around, and while I think he can still be a good player, I don't think it was happening here. He's a free shot for Houston, kinda like Elfrid Payton was for us. I am not even sure Houston even wanted him. It's quite likely he was simply added for his salary and we chose him because we saw no role for him here.

So my final roundup:

1. Talking about 2018 alone, we got the best player in the trade(Ryan Anderson)
2. We got the most interesting prospect in the trade(Melton)
3. We got the worst 2019 contract in the trade(Anderson)

I think 1 and 2 make up for #3. And if #1 proves to be false and Anderson struggles, we can just cut him and make #3 be false too.

Time will tell who really got the better end of the trade, but I feel good about it right now and have no problem with it. I'll be interested to see how Knight plays and whether Houston picks up the option years on Chriss. He's fairly cheap, so I imagine they will, but I'm not certain.

[Superbone]

Honestly I just don't care at all. Won't bat an eye if Chriss or Knight have good or bad seasons. They could become allstars and I'd still count the trade as a win.

Maybe in an alternate universe. Chriss has small hands or something. Can't use that athleticism to dunk the ball without losing it 70 percent of the time.

Honestly I'm with RW on this. Once the trade is made, there's no point revisiting it using hindsight. The most I can ask of the team/front office is that they made the best decision with the information available at the time. In this case, we don't need Chriss and Knight and we turned them into potentially useful assets (though I wish more thought went into these scenarios before we gave Ariza that 15 mil contract), and that's good enough for me. Clearly we weren't going to benefit from the presences of these players, so I won't begrudge what they become in the hands of a better coaching staff/team environment.

I was responding to the idea of them becoming all-stars.

[Cap]

I hear you Pickle, but at some point you need to just cut your loses. Knight and Chriss where not a real part of the team anymore and we got something we can use, even if just apparently as marginal as what we sent out.

We are talking about getting, what, an extra second rounder? That's not going to keep me from moving on those two garbage players.

I understand this line of thinking and I'm not upset that we moved on from Chriss and Knight. What my greater frustration is, we always seem to be the team taken advantage of in trades. I defended McD in another thread saying that given all the information available to us I cannot attribute to all the bad moves we've made in the past few years to him alone and isolate the Sarver effect, but in cases like this trade, I am guessing McD's effect is more profound.

I realize that I"m not the most articulate guy in the world, so let me use an analogy of sorts. When we've made trades in the past, on multiple occasions we were trying to fix a problem, so we had to take discounts on our merchandise. A good GM may have been able to get 90 cents on the dollar for these scenarios, and a bad one might only manage 80. In this regard I've actually been impressed with McD in both the Dragic and M******f trades. The Bledsoe one was a little disappointing. In this Knight/Chriss deal, we were not under any specific time pressure and it seems like we should've been able to get 90 cents on the dollar, but I feel like we got 80 again. This is the highest level of the game, and the margins are important. This is true both on and off the court. Not only do the players have to do all they can to prepare themselves, the front office should also be held to those standards. Always losing trades and always not maximizing the values of our assets in trades puts us behind as a franchise, and that frustrates me tremendously. It's especially upsetting that we also don't seem to be good at evaluating talent -- I feel like we lucked into Booker.

Again, I don't know everything that's happened, and this is just conjecture, but it still frustrates me.

I won't say this trade was a slam dunk in our favor. The Anderson contract makes me a little uneasy, even if we got the salary next year down to 15 million guaranteed. But I think we got the most interesting piece in the trade in De'Anthony Melton. He's an elite defensive prospect and if his shot is for real, he's the perfect fit next to Booker. I also find myself way more excited about what Ryan Anderson can do this year for us than what Knight or Chriss could have done.

I was maybe the biggest Chriss supporter around, and while I think he can still be a good player, I don't think it was happening here. He's a free shot for Houston, kinda like Elfrid Payton was for us. I am not even sure Houston even wanted him. It's quite likely he was simply added for his salary and we chose him because we saw no role for him here.

So my final roundup:

1. Talking about 2018 alone, we got the best player in the trade(Ryan Anderson)
2. We got the most interesting prospect in the trade(Melton)
3. We got the worst 2019 contract in the trade(Anderson)

I think 1 and 2 make up for #3. And if #1 proves to be false and Anderson struggles, we can just cut him and make #3 be false too.

Time will tell who really got the better end of the trade, but I feel good about it right now and have no problem with it. I'll be interested to see how Knight plays and whether Houston picks up the option years on Chriss. He's fairly cheap, so I imagine they will, but I'm not certain.

If we just cut him, we’re paying $15M to a guy who’s not even playing for us. How is that not still the worst contract in the trade?

[Indy]

I hear you Pickle, but at some point you need to just cut your loses. Knight and Chriss where not a real part of the team anymore and we got something we can use, even if just apparently as marginal as what we sent out.

We are talking about getting, what, an extra second rounder? That's not going to keep me from moving on those two garbage players.

I understand this line of thinking and I'm not upset that we moved on from Chriss and Knight. What my greater frustration is, we always seem to be the team taken advantage of in trades. I defended McD in another thread saying that given all the information available to us I cannot attribute to all the bad moves we've made in the past few years to him alone and isolate the Sarver effect, but in cases like this trade, I am guessing McD's effect is more profound.

I realize that I"m not the most articulate guy in the world, so let me use an analogy of sorts. When we've made trades in the past, on multiple occasions we were trying to fix a problem, so we had to take discounts on our merchandise. A good GM may have been able to get 90 cents on the dollar for these scenarios, and a bad one might only manage 80. In this regard I've actually been impressed with McD in both the Dragic and M******f trades. The Bledsoe one was a little disappointing. In this Knight/Chriss deal, we were not under any specific time pressure and it seems like we should've been able to get 90 cents on the dollar, but I feel like we got 80 again. This is the highest level of the game, and the margins are important. This is true both on and off the court. Not only do the players have to do all they can to prepare themselves, the front office should also be held to those standards. Always losing trades and always not maximizing the values of our assets in trades puts us behind as a franchise, and that frustrates me tremendously. It's especially upsetting that we also don't seem to be good at evaluating talent -- I feel like we lucked into Booker.

Again, I don't know everything that's happened, and this is just conjecture, but it still frustrates me.

I won't say this trade was a slam dunk in our favor. The Anderson contract makes me a little uneasy, even if we got the salary next year down to 15 million guaranteed. But I think we got the most interesting piece in the trade in De'Anthony Melton. He's an elite defensive prospect and if his shot is for real, he's the perfect fit next to Booker. I also find myself way more excited about what Ryan Anderson can do this year for us than what Knight or Chriss could have done.

I was maybe the biggest Chriss supporter around, and while I think he can still be a good player, I don't think it was happening here. He's a free shot for Houston, kinda like Elfrid Payton was for us. I am not even sure Houston even wanted him. It's quite likely he was simply added for his salary and we chose him because we saw no role for him here.

So my final roundup:

1. Talking about 2018 alone, we got the best player in the trade(Ryan Anderson)
2. We got the most interesting prospect in the trade(Melton)
3. We got the worst 2019 contract in the trade(Anderson)

I think 1 and 2 make up for #3. And if #1 proves to be false and Anderson struggles, we can just cut him and make #3 be false too.

Time will tell who really got the better end of the trade, but I feel good about it right now and have no problem with it. I'll be interested to see how Knight plays and whether Houston picks up the option years on Chriss. He's fairly cheap, so I imagine they will, but I'm not certain.

If we just cut him, we’re paying $15M to a guy who’s not even playing for us. How is that not still the worst contract in the trade?

I think he is saying that paying 15M to Knight not to play for you, or paying 15M to Anderson not to play for you is a wash.

[Split T]

Yes, what Indy said. Now Knight could prove to be playable, but we won't know until we see it. However, the last we saw of Knight, he wasn't playable. Anderson got run off the court defensively, but he's still an effective offensive weapon.

[ShelC]

Knight is what he is. I think Igor's been around long enough and seen Knight play enough to know he wasn't a good fit stylistically with how we wanted to play. If we felt the production on the court would be worth it, he'd still be here and we'd give him time to get healthy.

Chriss has pretty much been on the outs since the season ended. A lot of us sensed he was going to get traded, from not being in Vegas (much less playing in Vegas) and being pretty disconnected from the team in general during the summer. It was obvious he was Watson's guy and was given every opportunity early on, but that went away once Watson was fired. He never seemed to be McD's guy and wasn't showing any really great talent overall, so we cut bait.

You can say what you want about the haul we got for those guys, but it's addition by subtraction. You can't have a potentially toxic situation heading into the season - and we potentially had 2. We've had that before and this needs to be a clean start with a new coach and the young guys on the roster. Can't have Knight chirping about his minutes/role or demanding a trade (at the end of the 16-17 season he said he wasn't a bench player) and can't take the chance of Chriss showing up out of shape or being pushed out of the rotation, which would kill any value he might've have. Best to get ahead of these things, like we should've done with Markieff and Bledsoe.

We added size and shooting in Anderson, which we've desperately needed and a young PG with a ton of defensive potential and a growing offensive game. Could've done worse IMO.

[Superbone]

Knight is what he is. I think Igor's been around long enough and seen Knight play enough to know he wasn't a good fit stylistically with how we wanted to play. If we felt the production on the court would be worth it, he'd still be here and we'd give him time to get healthy.

Chriss has pretty much been on the outs since the season ended. A lot of us sensed he was going to get traded, from not being in Vegas (much less playing in Vegas) and being pretty disconnected from the team in general during the summer. It was obvious he was Watson's guy and was given every opportunity early on, but that went away once Watson was fired. He never seemed to be McD's guy and wasn't showing any really great talent overall, so we cut bait.

You can say what you want about the haul we got for those guys, but it's addition by subtraction. You can't have a potentially toxic situation heading into the season - and we potentially had 2. We've had that before and this needs to be a clean start with a new coach and the young guys on the roster. Can't have Knight chirping about his minutes/role or demanding a trade (at the end of the 16-17 season he said he wasn't a bench player) and can't take the chance of Chriss showing up out of shape or being pushed out of the rotation, which would kill any value he might've have. Best to get ahead of these things, like we should've done with M******f and Bledsoe.

We added size and shooting in Anderson, which we've desperately needed and a young PG with a ton of defensive potential and a growing offensive game. Could've done worse IMO.

Good point about "like we should've done with Markieff and Bledsoe". Maybe McD is learning.

Also, the Chriss situation was even stranger when he actually showed up in Vegas in spite of the fact he wasn't playing with the team and he was supposed to be working on his body in Seattle.

[Shabazz]

Chriss might be a decent "Second Draft" chance for Houston, but there are plenty of teams that have cut bait early on top-10 picks and had the decision justified after the fact. Jahlil Okafor, Nick Stauskus, Noah Vonleh, Anthony Bennett, Ben McLemore are a few examples.

[Ring_Wanted]

Pckle I love your posts.

I don't think we are very much taken advantage of. I've seen clear situations where the team was in a lower position in terms of leverage and still walk away with a good asset. Kieff for a lotto pick? Dragic gave the Suns what now happens to be the best draft asset around.

Making bad trades can be a different thing, though. And I agree we should have had more foresight. And even common sense. Some are unforgivable and unforgettable ajaja.

Sarver is always a factor for sure.
[/quote]

[Flagrant Fowl]

Chriss is a bum and will always be a bum. Knight might never play another meaningful minute ever again in the NBA.

What exactly are people upset about for dumping that on to someone else's plate?