Suns News: Week 18 2/23-3/1

[Mori Chu]

If you look at the Warriors and Blazers, they both had to draft multiple stars using top-ten 1st round picks in successive years. Warriors drafted Curry, Klay, Barnes, etc. and Blazers drafted Lillard and Aldridge (well, draft-day trade, but same thing).

This is why that Lakers pick is going to haunt us for a decade. It'll turn out to be the #4 or #6 or something, and there'll be a real stud available at that spot. We'll be saying, "We could have had ____ on our team." I'll never get over it.

[JCSunsfan]

If you look at the Warriors and Blazers, they both had to draft multiple stars using top-ten 1st round picks in successive years. Warriors drafted Curry, Klay, Barnes, etc. and Blazers drafted Lillard and Aldridge (well, draft-day trade, but same thing).

This is why that Lakers pick is going to haunt us for a decade. It'll turn out to be the #4 or #6 or something, and there'll be a real stud available at that spot. We'll be saying, "We could have had ____ on our team." I'll never get over it.

You will if they draft a bust. We will see. I think Knight, if he really progresses, could help you get over it too. Its a risk no doubt, and it could backfire for the Suns.

[Mori Chu]

Here's an article from David Aldridge summarizing the Suns' current situation. Not a lot of new info there, but it's interesting to hear the whole thing described from the outside.

http://www.nba.com/2015/news/features/d ... index.html

[Split T]

If you look at the Warriors and Blazers, they both had to draft multiple stars using top-ten 1st round picks in successive years. Warriors drafted Curry, Klay, Barnes, etc. and Blazers drafted Lillard and Aldridge (well, draft-day trade, but same thing).

This is why that Lakers pick is going to haunt us for a decade. It'll turn out to be the #4 or #6 or something, and there'll be a real stud available at that spot. We'll be saying, "We could have had ____ on our team." I'll never get over it.

Knight was 8th, so he fits in that mold anyways.

I think trading the pick was risky and it might end up hurting a bit, but it's not gonna "haunt us for a decade."

It's probably gonna be 7th-10th next year. Doubt it comes over this year. Lakers are gonna finish 4th to last, maybe 3rd this year(I think Minny might catch them) They could get jumped in the lottery but it's gonna take 2 or 3 teams jumping them(possible, not probable)

If it ends up 6th this year we'd be looking at Myles Turner, Kevon Looney, Mario Hezonja, Stanley Johnson or if a top 5 guy falls(okafor, towns, mudiay, russell, porzingis). Also would make it easier to jump into the top 5 via trade if we had #6. This is probably the worst case scenario.

It's too early to say anything about the value if it ends up in next years draft. Some experts are predicting a weaker than normal draft. All depends on how players develop and who stays and go's this year.

The way I look at it is this: Brandon Knight is a former 8th overall pick and I'd guess is probably better than your average #8 pick. I don't think he's a star, but he's good. The pick from the lakers is gonna be basically a #8 pick. Playing the averages, we have a better shot to come out on top with Knight. However, we will have to pay Knight significantly more and we do miss out on the possibility of finding a steal. We also keep ourselves from drafting a bust.

I'd rather have the pick, but there's a pretty decent chance that Knight ends up providing more value than the Laker pick.

[OE32]

If you look at the Warriors and Blazers, they both had to draft multiple stars using top-ten 1st round picks in successive years. Warriors drafted Curry, Klay, Barnes, etc. and Blazers drafted Lillard and Aldridge (well, draft-day trade, but same thing).

This is why that Lakers pick is going to haunt us for a decade. It'll turn out to be the #4 or #6 or something, and there'll be a real stud available at that spot. We'll be saying, "We could have had ____ on our team." I'll never get over it.

Knight was 8th, so he fits in that mold anyways.

I think trading the pick was risky and it might end up hurting a bit, but it's not gonna "haunt us for a decade."

It's probably gonna be 7th-10th next year. Doubt it comes over this year. Lakers are gonna finish 4th to last, maybe 3rd this year(I think Minny might catch them) They could get jumped in the lottery but it's gonna take 2 or 3 teams jumping them(possible, not probable)

If it ends up 6th this year we'd be looking at Myles Turner, Kevon Looney, Mario Hezonja, Stanley Johnson or if a top 5 guy falls(okafor, towns, mudiay, russell, porzingis). Also would make it easier to jump into the top 5 via trade if we had #6. This is probably the worst case scenario.

It's too early to say anything about the value if it ends up in next years draft. Some experts are predicting a weaker than normal draft. All depends on how players develop and who stays and go's this year.

The way I look at it is this: Brandon Knight is a former 8th overall pick and I'd guess is probably better than your average #8 pick. I don't think he's a star, but he's good. The pick from the lakers is gonna be basically a #8 pick. Playing the averages, we have a better shot to come out on top with Knight. However, we will have to pay Knight significantly more and we do miss out on the possibility of finding a steal. We also keep ourselves from drafting a bust.

I'd rather have the pick, but there's a pretty decent chance that Knight ends up providing more value than the Laker pick.

The way I think of it is, we collapsed a highly variable asset into a fixed asset. It was a swap - a floating for a fixed. Any finance people in here? Y'all get what I'm saying?

[Indy]

If you look at the Warriors and Blazers, they both had to draft multiple stars using top-ten 1st round picks in successive years. Warriors drafted Curry, Klay, Barnes, etc. and Blazers drafted Lillard and Aldridge (well, draft-day trade, but same thing).

This is why that Lakers pick is going to haunt us for a decade. It'll turn out to be the #4 or #6 or something, and there'll be a real stud available at that spot. We'll be saying, "We could have had ____ on our team." I'll never get over it.

Knight was 8th, so he fits in that mold anyways.

I think trading the pick was risky and it might end up hurting a bit, but it's not gonna "haunt us for a decade."

It's probably gonna be 7th-10th next year. Doubt it comes over this year. Lakers are gonna finish 4th to last, maybe 3rd this year(I think Minny might catch them) They could get jumped in the lottery but it's gonna take 2 or 3 teams jumping them(possible, not probable)

If it ends up 6th this year we'd be looking at Myles Turner, Kevon Looney, Mario Hezonja, Stanley Johnson or if a top 5 guy falls(okafor, towns, mudiay, russell, porzingis). Also would make it easier to jump into the top 5 via trade if we had #6. This is probably the worst case scenario.

It's too early to say anything about the value if it ends up in next years draft. Some experts are predicting a weaker than normal draft. All depends on how players develop and who stays and go's this year.

The way I look at it is this: Brandon Knight is a former 8th overall pick and I'd guess is probably better than your average #8 pick. I don't think he's a star, but he's good. The pick from the lakers is gonna be basically a #8 pick. Playing the averages, we have a better shot to come out on top with Knight. However, we will have to pay Knight significantly more and we do miss out on the possibility of finding a steal. We also keep ourselves from drafting a bust.

I'd rather have the pick, but there's a pretty decent chance that Knight ends up providing more value than the Laker pick.

The way I think of it is, we collapsed a highly variable asset into a fixed asset. It was a swap - a floating for a fixed. Any finance people in here? Y'all get what I'm saying?

The way I think of it is: we swapped a somewhat variable asset that would allow us to lock a new player of our choosing (within reason) to a 4 year, cheap wage, for a 3 month commitment from a known, somewhat fixed asset.

[OE32]

If the LA pick ends up great, the sour will say, see what a dumbass McD is? If the pick ends up shit, the sour will say, it was still stupid at the time.

I don't know how good Brandon Knight is, and we haven't seen much from him yet in a Suns uniform. withhold judgment for that reason. All indications are that we will be able to re-sign him (and certainly for a more reasonable amount than Goran).

[Mori Chu]

We'll see. His agent turned down a deal offer from the Bucks already; I forget the exact amount, but it was something like $10m/year. Are you willing to pay Knight what Bledsoe makes? More?

Also, this is a false dichotomy. If you like Knight so much, we should have just taken whatever amount we think he's worth and offered him that as an RFA from the Bucks. They already were queasy about re-signing him to big money, so they probably would not have matched. We'd have Knight and the pick, both.

We gave up the pick (and Plumlee, and Ennis) for 3 months of Knight. That is a bad deal.

[Split T]

We may have been able to get knight in the summer, but we'd probably have to overpay and surrender an asset or two as well. Bucks weren't gonna lose him for nothing and ultimately if we called their bluff I think they would have matched the offer.

[Indy]

Bingo.

[INFORMER]

The problem is with all of this is that it's just Brandon Knight. It's just Brandon Knight. He's not a special talent, hasn't proven great at anything, has never been efficient, and isn't a great fit at either guard position. He's a good player. But good players aren't that hard to come by.

I liked him in a package deal for Bledsoe when options were limited and in attempt to get something for him and as a more favorable alternative to paying Bledsoe. But to target him alone and give up multiple assets right before having to give him a substantial contract?! Gross.

[iLLmatic]

I liked him in a package deal for Bledsoe when options were limited and in attempt to get something for him and as a more favorable alternative to paying Bledsoe. But to target him alone and give up multiple assets right before having to give him a substantial contract?! Gross.

That move could end up rivaling Blanks move when trading Dragic and a 1st rounder away for Aaron Brooks.

[OE32]

The problem is with all of this is that it's just Brandon Knight. It's just Brandon Knight. He's not a special talent, hasn't proven great at anything, has never been efficient, and isn't a great fit at either guard position. He's a good player. But good players aren't that hard to come by.

This is the one argument worth making. The rest is bunk. The only real question is, is Brandon Knight any good?

[SDC]

"We can't protect home court without the best fans in the NBA!!!"

i love how he mocks the fans. i dare mcdo to trade him.

[INFORMER]

The problem is with all of this is that it's just Brandon Knight. It's just Brandon Knight. He's not a special talent, hasn't proven great at anything, has never been efficient, and isn't a great fit at either guard position. He's a good player. But good players aren't that hard to come by.

This is the one argument worth making. The rest is bunk.

The rest?

[TOO]

The problem is with all of this is that it's just Brandon Knight. It's just Brandon Knight. He's not a special talent, hasn't proven great at anything, has never been efficient, and isn't a great fit at either guard position. He's a good player. But good players aren't that hard to come by.

This is the one argument worth making. The rest is bunk.

The rest?

He hates naps.

[Mori Chu]

I thought he meant that he rests in his bunk.

[EDC]

The problem is with all of this is that it's just Brandon Knight. It's just Brandon Knight. He's not a special talent, hasn't proven great at anything, has never been efficient, and isn't a great fit at either guard position. He's a good player. But good players aren't that hard to come by.

This is the one argument worth making. The rest is bunk.

The rest?

The biggest problem is he is a guard. With the pick you have a chance at a big who could really make a difference.

[OE32]

By "the rest" I'm talking about our daydreaming about the LA pick and the fantasy that we could have gotten him this summer without giving up comparable assets. I regard Knight's quality as a basketball player to be the only true question.

[Split T]

The problem is with all of this is that it's just Brandon Knight. It's just Brandon Knight. He's not a special talent, hasn't proven great at anything, has never been efficient, and isn't a great fit at either guard position. He's a good player. But good players aren't that hard to come by.

I liked him in a package deal for Bledsoe when options were limited and in attempt to get something for him and as a more favorable alternative to paying Bledsoe. But to target him alone and give up multiple assets right before having to give him a substantial contract?! Gross.

It's a valid argument and mostly how I feel as well. I'd rather have kept the pick and packaged it with other assets to get a better asset(two $5 for a $10 instead we traded a $5 bill for a different $5 bill)but I don't hate the trade. I don't think the laker pick is as valuable as some suggest.

Here is to landing Knight for somewhere in the vicinity of 4 yr 44 million and watching him take another step next year. Someone mentioned this earlier, but he's younger than Lillard and puts up reasonably close numbers. He's not the pg or athlete that lillard is, but he's not far off.