Phx-Suns.Net

I would take Westbrook if we didn't have to give up Booker. Having Russell here with our current young team (minus Booker) would be kind of a waste. He wouldn't have anybody to pass it to, and he'd probably take 40 shots a game while guiding us to a bunch of losses. By the time our young guys got good, he'd be old.

It doesn't make any sense to me. I'd rather grow with Booker.

I'm with you guys, having Booker in the deal makes it a non-starter.

The latest rumor is a 3 way trade with Sacramento sending Gay to Philly, the Suns sending a PG to Sac, and Okafor to PHX. If it's Knight that's going out the door, I think I'm down with that trade. After watching how the Bender, Chriss, Williams trio is playing this summer, I think it could really help Okafor look like a legit center defender and his offensive game would improve with the better ball movement with those guys.

I guess my question would be, does adding Westbrook to this team for the next two years, even if we didn't have to give up Booker, make us a contender in those two years? I don't think so. And I doubt he would stay here after that, even if we gave him $200M. And do we think Booker reaches his potential with Westbrook as our PG (and I guess, adding to all those questions, do we think Booker will be a better player than Westbrook?)?

In2ition wrote:I'm with you guys, having Booker in the deal makes it a non-starter.

The latest rumor is a 3 way trade with Sacramento sending Gay to Philly, the Suns sending a PG to Sac, and Okafor to PHX. If it's Knight that's going out the door, I think I'm down with that trade. After watching how the Bender, Chriss, Williams trio is playing this summer, I think it could really help Okafor look like a legit center defender and his offensive game would improve with the better ball movement with those guys.

I don't like Okafor as a prospect. Not interested in trading for him. Rather would have a guy like Noel.

Indy wrote:I guess my question would be, does adding Westbrook to this team for the next two years, even if we didn't have to give up Booker, make us a contender in those two years? I don't think so. And I doubt he would stay here after that, even if we gave him $200M. And do we think Booker reaches his potential with Westbrook as our PG (and I guess, adding to all those questions, do we think Booker will be a better player than Westbrook?)?

No, No, and I don't know. I certainly like Booker better. Right now, Westbrook is clearly better, but I just don't know where Booker's ceiling is yet. I think it is very high.

Sunsfan4life wrote:

In2ition wrote:I'm with you guys, having Booker in the deal makes it a non-starter.

The latest rumor is a 3 way trade with Sacramento sending Gay to Philly, the Suns sending a PG to Sac, and Okafor to PHX. If it's Knight that's going out the door, I think I'm down with that trade. After watching how the Bender, Chriss, Williams trio is playing this summer, I think it could really help Okafor look like a legit center defender and his offensive game would improve with the better ball movement with those guys.

I don't like Okafor as a prospect. Not interested in trading for him. Rather would have a guy like Noel.

I think part of the thinking is that Okafor is younger and has more years locked up at the rookie scale. Noel is up for restricted free agency at the same time as Len. You may be right though, Noel could be the better prospect.

O_Gardino wrote:

Indy wrote:I guess my question would be, does adding Westbrook to this team for the next two years, even if we didn't have to give up Booker, make us a contender in those two years? I don't think so. And I doubt he would stay here after that, even if we gave him $200M. And do we think Booker reaches his potential with Westbrook as our PG (and I guess, adding to all those questions, do we think Booker will be a better player than Westbrook?)?

No, No, and I don't know. I certainly like Booker better. Right now, Westbrook is clearly better, but I just don't know where Booker's ceiling is yet. I think it is very high.

All I know is I'd rather root for Booker than Westbrook. Booker is just so easy to like, and he has great chemistry with the rooks.

Lets be honest, when you draft a guy you have a bigger connection to him. This is true in any sport.

Yes to Okafor in exchange for a PG. No to Westbrook if it costs Booker.

carey wrote:

Cap wrote:
The only assurance he could give us would be the same kind Carlos Boozer gave the Cavs. Just sayin'.

Not true. This is a one time situation because of the cap rise, but he could negotiate for $8M more this year by adding on a 1+1 which would give us Wesbrook for 2 years at a max deal. Then in 2 years could sign a $200M deal.

That said, I still wouldn't want to trade Bledsoe & Booker for 2 years of Westbrook.

Bledsoe, pj, Archie, and Knight?

If Westbrook doesn't want to stay in Oklahoma I have a hard time expecting him to stay in Phoenix.

Westbrook just doesn't make sense here unless you're going to trade away a lot of the youth and bring in veterans. It would have to be a Boston KG/Ray Allen type scenario. I'd rather stand pat and maybe add a piece when it makes sense after our youngsters have matured and are entering their prime.

What about this?

OKC trades Westbrook, Nick Collison, Anthony Murrow for Bledsoe, Knight, the Heat's 2018 pick, a $100 Amazon Gift Card and a handjob from Ryan McDonough. Who says no?

McDonough has small hands. That's a deal breaker right there.

Superbone wrote:McDonough has small hands. That's a deal breaker right there.

Yeah but...

hahaha I tought about that scene immediately.

Westbrook is a great NBA asset. We'd have to trade for him if it came up. But I really don't want to root for him. I'd rather find some other way to get better as a team. No more chuckers, no me-first players, no headcases!

Cap wrote:

O_Gardino wrote:

Indy wrote:I guess my question would be, does adding Westbrook to this team for the next two years, even if we didn't have to give up Booker, make us a contender in those two years? I don't think so. And I doubt he would stay here after that, even if we gave him $200M. And do we think Booker reaches his potential with Westbrook as our PG (and I guess, adding to all those questions, do we think Booker will be a better player than Westbrook?)?

No, No, and I don't know. I certainly like Booker better. Right now, Westbrook is clearly better, but I just don't know where Booker's ceiling is yet. I think it is very high.

All I know is I'd rather root for Booker than Westbrook. Booker is just so easy to like, and he has great chemistry with the rooks.

Absolutely agree. And that's part of his talent ceiling too. Booker is a better leader / teammate already. What player tells their agent to get them to OKC so they can play with Westbrook? Book has the potential to become that kind of draw.

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:Westbrook is a great NBA asset. We'd have to trade for him if it came up. But I really don't want to root for him. I'd rather find some other way to get better as a team. No more chuckers, no me-first players, no headcases!

Westbrook is not an asset. Only a team's contract with Westbrook is an asset. And no, Westbrook's contract is not a particularly attractive asset at this point.