Phx-Suns.Net

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 9:17 pm

Here it comes

Yeah, while 5 years isn't great, it's not crippling either, I think over the 5 years it'll start around 14% and then finish up around 8% of the space as the cap increases.

Another option is the “delayed stretch” which would reduce the cap hit to only 4 seasons.

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 8:23 pm

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 8:14 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 9:30 am

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 8:55 am

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 7:37 am

Beal is the only way out of the 2nd apron…unless a miracle trade occurs, he’s getting waived and stretched, so prepare yourself now

Just stretch Grayson if you have to. Would be much better than the cap hit from Beal.

I don’t think that gets you far enough…but also you could combine that with dumping Richards and/or Royce and it might…

However, waiving and stretching Grayson is dumb because he’s tradable…he’s got value. I’m not sure there’s a way to fully absorb his salary somewhere, but we could probably trade him for say someone at 9-10 million and save basically the same amount you would in a stretch.

Beal is giving up about $7M per year in the buyout, so we don’t need too much more to get under the second apron.

So you want to buyout Beal and then stretch Grayson? So you are against having 19 million of dead money tied up in Beal for 5 years, but 58 million this year, 61 million next year and then 11 million the following 3 years is fine?

Plus we wouldn’t have Beal or Grayson…that somehow is a worse idea than waiving and stretching Beal.

I don’t know what you’re talking about. Where are you getting the $11 million from? Grayson would be about $7M per year stretched. That’s a lot better than $19M.

But I thought he only had two years left—I wouldn’t want to do it unless he declined his player option.

Anyway, I said “if you have to” it’s a better option. Obviously I would trade him into space if I could.

Another option: With Beal’s buyout, dumping Richards and stretching Royce (only $4.7M per year) could get you under the apron.

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 9:34 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 8:23 pm

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 8:14 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 9:30 am

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 8:55 am

Just stretch Grayson if you have to. Would be much better than the cap hit from Beal.

I don’t think that gets you far enough…but also you could combine that with dumping Richards and/or Royce and it might…

However, waiving and stretching Grayson is dumb because he’s tradable…he’s got value. I’m not sure there’s a way to fully absorb his salary somewhere, but we could probably trade him for say someone at 9-10 million and save basically the same amount you would in a stretch.

Beal is giving up about $7M per year in the buyout, so we don’t need too much more to get under the second apron.

So you want to buyout Beal and then stretch Grayson? So you are against having 19 million of dead money tied up in Beal for 5 years, but 58 million this year, 61 million next year and then 11 million the following 3 years is fine?

Plus we wouldn’t have Beal or Grayson…that somehow is a worse idea than waiving and stretching Beal.

I don’t know what you’re talking about. Where are you getting the $11 million from? Grayson would be about $7M per year stretched. That’s a lot better than $19M.

But I thought he only had two years left—I wouldn’t want to do it unless he declined his player option.

Anyway, I said “if you have to” it’s a better option. Obviously I would trade him into space if I could.

Another option: With Beal’s buyout, dumping Richards and stretching Royce (only $4.7M per year) could get you under the apron.

I stretched it over 5, my bad, it would be over 7…so about 8 million a year for 7 years. So 55, 58, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8.

That still doesn’t seem good to me. I think stretching good basketball players is a bad idea all around.

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 10:02 pm

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 9:34 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 8:23 pm

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 8:14 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 9:30 am

I don’t think that gets you far enough…but also you could combine that with dumping Richards and/or Royce and it might…

However, waiving and stretching Grayson is dumb because he’s tradable…he’s got value. I’m not sure there’s a way to fully absorb his salary somewhere, but we could probably trade him for say someone at 9-10 million and save basically the same amount you would in a stretch.

Beal is giving up about $7M per year in the buyout, so we don’t need too much more to get under the second apron.

So you want to buyout Beal and then stretch Grayson? So you are against having 19 million of dead money tied up in Beal for 5 years, but 58 million this year, 61 million next year and then 11 million the following 3 years is fine?

Plus we wouldn’t have Beal or Grayson…that somehow is a worse idea than waiving and stretching Beal.

I don’t know what you’re talking about. Where are you getting the $11 million from? Grayson would be about $7M per year stretched. That’s a lot better than $19M.

But I thought he only had two years left—I wouldn’t want to do it unless he declined his player option.

Anyway, I said “if you have to” it’s a better option. Obviously I would trade him into space if I could.

Another option: With Beal’s buyout, dumping Richards and stretching Royce (only $4.7M per year) could get you under the apron.

I stretched it over 5, my bad, it would be over 7…so about 8 million a year for 7 years. So 55, 58, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8.

That still doesn’t seem good to me. I think stretching good basketball players is a bad idea all around.

Yeah like I said, I wouldn’t want to do it for 7 years. Royce wouldn’t be as bad because it would only be about $4.7M per year.

It’s not a lot of money, but you wouldn’t need to do it. He’s a useful basketball player. Someone would trade for him and probably send you back a player with less money than that 4.7 million.

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 10:07 pm

It’s not a lot of money, but you wouldn’t need to do it. He’s a useful basketball player. Someone would trade for him and probably send you back a player with less money than that 4.7 million.

There are multiple options, yes.

So why are we (as a fanbase) letting the media get away with excusing the Beal stretch as “it’s the only way to get under the second apron”? When it’s really just about saving Mat luxury tax payments.

I think the other options were much easier at the start of free agency. Beal also gets it done without messing with anyone they were planning on being on the team. You’re right that I didn’t really consider waiving Beal(but not stretching) and then still dumping rotation players, but not sure I like that much better. I definitely would have preferred a Grayson into cap space path earlier in free agency, but I think it’s clear we didn’t really pursue that.

I doubt we do this, but if the 14m number is accurate that Beal is giving up, it drops us about 6 million under the 1st apron. I think it’s more likely we make another cost saving move to dodge the tax altogether, but we could acquire players via S&T now. Grayson for Kuminga? Grayson and Royce for Giddey? Those could actually be options.

Whenever you are talking about saving some obscenely huge amount of money, like a couple hundred million dollars IIRC, I can't blame Ishbia.

I mean I get it…he doesn’t want to pay the tax for a bad team…but then why do this half ass competing thing? He should’ve properly blew it up if he didn’t want to fully compete.

I’ve come to terms with the waive the stretch option since it was floated as possibility earlier this year. I think we had a chance to do a trade when we were loaded with 2nd rounders but we choose to use them on draft night and now we are back to waive and stretch option. I don’t like it but it is what it at this point.


I do wonder if we do something gross like sign and trade for Kuminga lol Like Grayson and Richards to GS for him.

Kuminga wants 30m a year, I do not believe he's on the Suns radar.

I wouldn’t be opposed to a Grayson and Royce for John Collins deal, but I’m not exactly sure why Utah would consider it.

Then again, they traded Sexton and a 2nd for Nurkic, so who knows.

3TheHardaway wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 12:52 pm

I much prefer just eating the contact for two years and utilizing 2026-2027 to develop Dunn, Maluach, Fleming (maybe even Green), and then getting a huge chunk of salary cap to use to improve the roster in Summer 2027.

I think the team as is could grow together and chase a playoff bid in the interim, and re-develop some sense of unity and culture that we had with Mikal/Cam/Book/DA that all great teams possess. And then once Beal is off the books, we might be able to afford a missing piece in free agency to push the team to the next level. I recognize FA isn't what it used to be, but valuable players still do hit the market (Turner).

This is the way.

TOO wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 11:21 pm

Kuminga wants 30m a year, I do not believe he's on the Suns radar.

I hope so but we tried to trade for him at the deadline. Idk what his price tag matters at all, once the Beal waive and stretch is official, they can combine salary and we could easily meet that number.

I hope it doesn’t happen but grosser things have been done.

TOO wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 1:02 pm

Maybe they take a swing on a guy like Malcom Brogdon?

Meh. Too redundant probably. I'd rather go after Melton, but he seems Lakers-bound.

SunsShine wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 11:29 pm

I wouldn’t be opposed to a Grayson and Royce for John Collins deal, but I’m not exactly sure why Utah would consider it.

Then again, they traded Sexton and a 2nd for Nurkic, so who knows.

Nice option. Problem is that for us, it represents basically no savings if the main driver is to get under the second apron without needing to stretch Beal. But if I was UTA I'd do it for sure. The reports say there was not market for Collins, so this scenario would be really nice for them. If this was on the table, they can afford take it, be patient and wait until the deadline to try to move them for some future assets.

The way I see this financially for the Suns if we stretch Beal for $20 mil per year for 5 years it will be work like this:

Beals Salaries

25/26 = 54Mil - 20 Mil to buy the stretch and 11 Mil to get under the 2nd apron - we will have 23 Mil to Spend while staying under the 2nd apron.

26/27 = 57 Mil - 20 MIl to buy and stretch a saving of $37 Mil from what we would have had with Beal.

27/28 = We would have had no more salary to pay Beal so we reduce our ability to spend by $20 Mil while staying under the 2nd apron.

So it looks like to me that we will be able to get a legit free agent this summer that could help. Maybe CP3 who probably will retire either next summer or the following summer while also being able to combine salaries for a trade for someone we want. Grayson, O'Neale and Richards. Who could we get?

I like Giddy from Chicago. If that happens, we don't sign CP3 and hire him as our lead assistant coach. Or maybe we trade Green for Giddy. Lots of options.

Ring_Wanted wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 07, 2025 12:15 am

SunsShine wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 06, 2025 11:29 pm

I wouldn’t be opposed to a Grayson and Royce for John Collins deal, but I’m not exactly sure why Utah would consider it.

Then again, they traded Sexton and a 2nd for Nurkic, so who knows.

Nice option. Problem is that for us, it represents basically no savings if the main driver is to get under the second apron without needing to stretch Beal. But if I was UTA I'd do it for sure. The reports say there was not market for Collins, so this scenario would be really nice for them. If this was on the table, they can afford take it, be patient and wait until the deadline to try to move them for some future assets.

The waive and stretch is all but guaranteed for Beal now