I feel like there's some kind of misconception that letting Ayton leave is somehow part of us getting KD. But it sounds like it is completely unrelated. To me this smells like another penny-pinching Bobby Saver move. Trade Ayton for bantha fodder and a pick, then try to get KD with ... what? Mikal and Cam and a million picks? And basically we'll have no starting center because we were too cheap to keep the one we had?
I really do not want to show up for training camp with a team of CP3 + Book + KD + 12 minimum-contract scrubs, with a decade's worth of picks forfeited to get there. But that's what I am expecting at this point.
Your opinion here feels too pessimistic and really not the context of the fact that we have JJ running the show. It is related but I can see your reasonable logic. Indy wants Ayton, that’s clear.
Sabonis was tempting but not enough. Getting KD is priority now. Any Ayton move is in some service of that whether for reason above that you don’t need a 4th option making near max $ or we need draft compensation to use in the trade.
I feel like there's some kind of misconception that letting Ayton leave is somehow part of us getting KD. But it sounds like it is completely unrelated. To me this smells like another penny-pinching Bobby Saver move. Trade Ayton for bantha fodder and a pick, then try to get KD with ... what? Mikal and Cam and a million picks? And basically we'll have no starting center because we were too cheap to keep the one we had?
I really do not want to show up for training camp with a team of CP3 + Book + KD + 12 minimum-contract scrubs, with a decade's worth of picks forfeited to get there. But that's what I am expecting at this point.
Your opinion here feels too pessimistic and really not the context of the fact that we have JJ running the show. It is related but I can see your reasonable logic. Indy wants Ayton, that’s clear. Sabonis was tempting but not enough. Getting KD is priority now. Any Ayton move is in some service of that whether for reason above that you don’t need a 4th option making near max $ or we need draft compensation to use in the trade.
I wonder how far in advance we have been planning for KD. There is no way it was just this summer. And that fits with us offering DA a max, but only at 4 years last summer instead of the Designated Max Rookie Extension.
So does that mean we didn't do the Sabonis move because we thought it would make our options for KD less appealing? Or related in another way? Or just didn't work out? I know it was said by some insiders that Monty put the quash on it because he didn't want to shake up the team that late into the season, but I don't know.
FWIW, I will also be very disappointed if all we get for Ayton is Myles Turner and maybe a draft pick.
That is because you're in denial about Ayton's value.
The BYC restrictions play a factor, but ultimately, Ayton isn't coveted around the league.
If the entire league were starting with blank rosters, and you would still have to build a full roster and abide by cap rules, I wonder what % of the cap teams would think Ayton is worth. I would probably put the over/under around 16-18%.
Just want to say on the Dallas series blame pie chart, Monty and CP have much bigger slices than Ayton. Much.
The Dallas series was an organizational epic fail. Ayton/Booker/CP3/Monty/Jimmy Jones - they all have a substantial share in that. It is right up there with the back-to-back up 2-0 losses to the Rockets in '94 & '95.
What I am saying is that replacing KD's salary is not the difference. It is giving Ayton a +20M raise. Raising our salary by +20M even if we replace everyone else in our top 8 with minimum salary g-leaguers or old vets looking to ring chase, means we are significantly over the tax. So that ~30M for Ayton now costs 45-50M.
So it has nothing to do with KD. That's just an excuse.
What I am saying is that replacing KD's salary is not the difference. It is giving Ayton a +20M raise. Raising our salary by +20M even if we replace everyone else in our top 8 with minimum salary g-leaguers or old vets looking to ring chase, means we are significantly over the tax. So that ~30M for Ayton now costs 45-50M.
So it has nothing to do with KD. That's just an excuse.
Yes it does because you have to replace the rotation players you send out to get a top 5 player.
What I am saying is that replacing KD's salary is not the difference. It is giving Ayton a +20M raise. Raising our salary by +20M even if we replace everyone else in our top 8 with minimum salary g-leaguers or old vets looking to ring chase, means we are significantly over the tax. So that ~30M for Ayton now costs 45-50M. Why in the world would you pay that much for your 4th best player?
Thank you, Indy. I know the "Sarver is cheap" criticism is an easy one to play, but we're talking about some serious L-Tax spending for a player they clearly don't value. I wouldn't expect any owner to do that.
What I am saying is that replacing KD's salary is not the difference. It is giving Ayton a +20M raise. Raising our salary by +20M even if we replace everyone else in our top 8 with minimum salary g-leaguers or old vets looking to ring chase, means we are significantly over the tax. So that ~30M for Ayton now costs 45-50M.
So it has nothing to do with KD. That's just an excuse.
Yes it does because you have to replace the rotation players you send out to get a top 5 player.
Meaning...? I already showed how that could cost you less than if you didn't trade for KD. So it has nothing to do with KD.
What I am saying is that replacing KD's salary is not the difference. It is giving Ayton a +20M raise. Raising our salary by +20M even if we replace everyone else in our top 8 with minimum salary g-leaguers or old vets looking to ring chase, means we are significantly over the tax. So that ~30M for Ayton now costs 45-50M. Why in the world would you pay that much for your 4th best player?
Thank you, Indy. I know the "Sarver is cheap" criticism is an easy one to play, but we're talking about some serious L-Tax spending for a player they clearly don't value. I wouldn't expect any owner to do that.
It was always stated as a given that the Suns would match a max offer sheet for Ayton and they were willing to pay the tax to keep the team together. Jones basically said that himself.
So now, just because they have the opportunity to get even better by supplanting Ayton's top 2 or top 3 position on the team, and making him 3rd or 4th best, means that they should get worse instead, even though it raises your luxury tax bill by ZERO dollars to add KD, just so they aren't overpaying for a 4th option? Makes zero sense.
"I'm a Deandre Ayton guy."--Al McCoy, September 21, 2022.
What I am saying is that replacing KD's salary is not the difference. It is giving Ayton a +20M raise. Raising our salary by +20M even if we replace everyone else in our top 8 with minimum salary g-leaguers or old vets looking to ring chase, means we are significantly over the tax. So that ~30M for Ayton now costs 45-50M. Why in the world would you pay that much for your 4th best player?
I've seen variations of this argument in other places and I don't think it's the right way to look at it. Just because Ayton's deal is the one to push us over the cap it doesn't mean he costs double. He costs his salary + a proportional amount of the luxury tax relative to his salary's % of our payroll. So if he were to sign a $30M deal and our total salary went to $164M (resulting in a $15M tax payment), his actual cost would be ~$33M (30 + (30/164 * 15)).
I feel like there's some kind of misconception that letting Ayton leave is somehow part of us getting KD. But it sounds like it is completely unrelated. To me this smells like another penny-pinching Bobby Saver move. Trade Ayton for bantha fodder and a pick, then try to get KD with ... what? Mikal and Cam and a million picks? And basically we'll have no starting center because we were too cheap to keep the one we had?
I really do not want to show up for training camp with a team of CP3 + Book + KD + 12 minimum-contract scrubs, with a decade's worth of picks forfeited to get there. But that's what I am expecting at this point.
Your opinion here feels too pessimistic and really not the context of the fact that we have JJ running the show. It is related but I can see your reasonable logic. Indy wants Ayton, that’s clear. Sabonis was tempting but not enough. Getting KD is priority now. Any Ayton move is in some service of that whether for reason above that you don’t need a 4th option making near max $ or we need draft compensation to use in the trade.
I wonder how far in advance we have been planning for KD. There is no way it was just this summer. And that fits with us offering DA a max, but only at 4 years last summer instead of the Designated Max Rookie Extension.
So does that mean we didn't do the Sabonis move because we thought it would make our options for KD less appealing? Or related in another way? Or just didn't work out? I know it was said by some insiders that Monty put the quash on it because he didn't want to shake up the team that late into the season, but I don't know.
Wasn’t something said last summer about wanting another star in the wake of Ayton not getting his extension?
What I am saying is that replacing KD's salary is not the difference. It is giving Ayton a +20M raise. Raising our salary by +20M even if we replace everyone else in our top 8 with minimum salary g-leaguers or old vets looking to ring chase, means we are significantly over the tax. So that ~30M for Ayton now costs 45-50M. Why in the world would you pay that much for your 4th best player?
Thank you, Indy. I know the "Sarver is cheap" criticism is an easy one to play, but we're talking about some serious L-Tax spending for a player they clearly don't value. I wouldn't expect any owner to do that.
It was always stated as a given that the Suns would match a max offer sheet for Ayton and they were willing to pay the tax to keep the team together. Jones basically said that himself.
Well first, any talk of matching an Ayton offer sheet has negotiation value; don't forget that.
Secondly, I'm not saying the Suns aren't willing to pay the luxury tax. They are. But they are going to be selective about how that money is spent. So again, when looking at paying Ayton, if they don't value him at a certainly salary, AND hat salary is going to lead to L-Tax spending, then that isn't going to be appealing to them.
What I am saying is that replacing KD's salary is not the difference. It is giving Ayton a +20M raise. Raising our salary by +20M even if we replace everyone else in our top 8 with minimum salary g-leaguers or old vets looking to ring chase, means we are significantly over the tax. So that ~30M for Ayton now costs 45-50M. Why in the world would you pay that much for your 4th best player?
I've seen variations of this argument in other places and I don't think it's the right way to look at it. Just because Ayton's deal is the one to push us over the cap it doesn't mean he costs double. He costs his salary + a proportional amount of the luxury tax relative to his salary's % of our payroll. So if he were to sign a $30M deal and our total salary went to $164M (resulting in a $15M tax payment), his actual cost would be ~$33M (30 + (30/164 * 15)).
This is a very fair take and I totally get it. I guess my counter argument is, you aren't trading Book (we don't want to) or CP3 (nobody else wants to pay him 30M) and if you get KD you aren't cutting his salary. So you have to then look at the rest of your roster and see if you can justify the salary (including the tax) for the value each remaining player gives you. Tacking on a million to a 2M contract is pretty easy to justify for a rotation player that is on a min deal. It is a lot harder to justify paying 30 or 33M for your 4th best player (especially when the rest of the league doesn't value him at that).
I’ll say this. If they let Ayton walk for nothing then you better be sure you’re getting KD. Better be sure you’re getting KD and keeping at least 1 of the twins.
How about this: Wouldn't Ayton, despite his flaws, be a GREAT center to put in a lineup that also has CP3, Book, and KD? That starting lineup wouldn't need Ayton to be a primary creator on offense. Instead, he would anchor our defense while also complementing the offense with screen rolls and inside moves initiated by catching entry passes. CP3-Book-Mikal-KD-Ayton is a NASTY starting lineup. That same lineup with ... Bismack Biyombo? Not really as scary.
Keeping Ayton would cause us to pay more tax? So? Don't you pay the tax if it means you have a dynasty-level team that would be immediately favored to win the title? Why are we optimizing our roster moves based on our concern for poor Sarver's pocketbook?
Perhaps you'd say, it's not about saving Sarver money; it's just that I'd rather spend that money on something else rather than Ayton. But that's just it. If we don't spend that on Ayton, we *won't* spend it on anything else. We'll just pocket the savings and help Sarver's bottom line. We won't spend the money on someone else; we'll be capped out and in the tax, so we'll just sign minimum guys to fill out the roster. So it's Ayton or scrubs, and we're choosing scrubs, because it will save Sarver some cold hard cash.
I just don't get why this fanbase has internalized the decades of penny-pinching cheapness that has come to define Sarver's tenure as owner. The Warriors spend whatever they can to make the team better. And they just won the title. Why won't we do that?
I would love to see us bring in KD and pay Ayton and then bring in another top tier guard off the bench while also finding a great defender and 3 point shooter to play with the starters. Oh, and lower ticket prices!
It is completely unrealistic to think Sarver will pay 20M in taxes, whether we want him to or not. I am not sure any owner outside of a top 5 market would do that because they just can't afford to do that.
So I would rather spend that money on Kevin Durant (who is paid what he is worth) than Deandre Ayton (who the rest of the league is saying they don't want to pay what he wants).
This bugs me ..this lineup with DA got pummeled by a less capable team in the second round...we collapsed. What in the world makes anyone think that standing pat, CP a year older, equates to a different outcome?
Crazy - Repeating a given behaviour and expecting the outcome to change...
The Warriors spend whatever they can to make the team better. And they just won the title. Why won't we do that?
How much money do the Warriors make last year? Compare that to the Suns. Then see what it would do the company if the Suns paid an extra 20M in salary tax. There is the top 5 markets can do that.
This bugs me ..this lineup with DA got pummeled by a less capable team in the second round...we collapsed. What in the world makes anyone think that standing pat, CP a year older, equates to a different outcome?
Crazy - Repeating a given behaviour and expecting the outcome to change...
But he might live up to his potential (I mean capacity) this time.
