Phx-Suns.Net

In2ition wrote:

O_Gardino wrote:

Indy wrote:

carey wrote:There's a pretty good chance that the Nets pick winds up somewhere from 6-9. I don't know if we have anything of value I would want to move for that. I guess maybe Bledsoe but I think they want a "star." They are convinced it will be a top 3 pick. The East sucks so much that I'm not.

If they are thinking IT is going to be greatly limited this year, and Lebron wants Bledsoe, I would absolutely do that trade. Not sure we can do it without taking salary back. Can we?

I'm with you, I would do that in a heartbeat.

We do have to take back salary, but we are so far under the cap, that we would have to spend that money anyway. Bled for Pick + Frye + Shumpert?

I would add the Miami 2018 pick with Bledsoe for that.

You would give up a good starting PG and bring back dead salary to move up a few slots in the draft? If that's what Miami demanded, I would be open to the idea. Seems like Miami will make the playoffs and NJ will be bad again, but there's a chance we would be giving up a lot to move up from 15 to 9.

O_Gardino wrote:

In2ition wrote:

O_Gardino wrote:

Indy wrote:

carey wrote:There's a pretty good chance that the Nets pick winds up somewhere from 6-9. I don't know if we have anything of value I would want to move for that. I guess maybe Bledsoe but I think they want a "star." They are convinced it will be a top 3 pick. The East sucks so much that I'm not.

If they are thinking IT is going to be greatly limited this year, and Lebron wants Bledsoe, I would absolutely do that trade. Not sure we can do it without taking salary back. Can we?

I'm with you, I would do that in a heartbeat.

We do have to take back salary, but we are so far under the cap, that we would have to spend that money anyway. Bled for Pick + Frye + Shumpert?

I would add the Miami 2018 pick with Bledsoe for that.

You would give up a good starting PG and bring back dead salary to move up a few slots in the draft? If that's what Miami demanded, I would be open to the idea. Seems like Miami will make the playoffs and NJ will be bad again, but there's a chance we would be giving up a lot to move up from 15 to 9.

That seems like the worse possible projection. It could be moving up from 22 to 1.

In2ition wrote:

O_Gardino wrote:

In2ition wrote:

O_Gardino wrote:

Indy wrote: If they are thinking IT is going to be greatly limited this year, and Lebron wants Bledsoe, I would absolutely do that trade. Not sure we can do it without taking salary back. Can we?

I'm with you, I would do that in a heartbeat.

We do have to take back salary, but we are so far under the cap, that we would have to spend that money anyway. Bled for Pick + Frye + Shumpert?

I would add the Miami 2018 pick with Bledsoe for that.

You would give up a good starting PG and bring back dead salary to move up a few slots in the draft? If that's what Miami demanded, I would be open to the idea. Seems like Miami will make the playoffs and NJ will be bad again, but there's a chance we would be giving up a lot to move up from 15 to 9.

That seems like the worse possible projection. It could be moving up from 22 to 1.

Yes, it's the worst possible. And 22 to 1 is the best. It's a gamble.

Why would the Cavs want Bledsoe when they just got IT? Are you assuming IT will be injured for a long time? Even if he's out for part of the season, won't it be awkward to have both of those PGs under long-term contracts for big (ish) money?

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:Why would the Cavs want Bledsoe when they just got IT? Are you assuming IT will be injured for a long time? Even if he's out for part of the season, won't it be awkward to have both of those PGs under long-term contracts for big (ish) money?

IT is in the last year of his deal and by what happened with the physical, not in great shape for performing like he did in Boston any time soon.

Bledsoe has this year at 14.5, and next year at 15.

If IT is such damaged goods, why did they trade Kyrie Irving for him? It doesn't make any sense to immediately marginalize your marquee asset by trading for another starting PG.

And if you say that IT wasn't the marquee asset, that the pick was; well then, why should they immediately trade that pick away? Now they've essentially traded one All-NBA PG for two mediocre or damaged PGs. That's an awful haul for Kyrie.

Guys I just don't see y the Cavs would trade that pick for Bled. I am surprised this discussion still going on tbh, they will be looking for more than a good player (border line) all star so I don't envision them using the pick in a pkg with salary dumps. IMO it will be another swing for the fences type move so probably trading a starter and the pick for a "big 3" type which kinda takes us out of the possible scenarios.

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:If IT is such damaged goods, why did they trade Kyrie Irving for him? It doesn't make any sense to immediately marginalize your marquee asset by trading for another starting PG.

And if you say that IT wasn't the marquee asset, that the pick was; well then, why should they immediately trade that pick away? Now they've essentially traded one All-NBA PG for two mediocre or damaged PGs. That's an awful haul for Kyrie.

Look at the other trades made lately for 'stars' around the league. What was the haul? Now add a guy that publicly came out and asked for a trade? When we traded Dragic (an All-NBA level guard at the top of his game), we essentially got two first round picks, with neither of them slated to be top 10 picks.

bajanguy008 wrote:Guys I just don't see y the Cavs would trade that pick for Bled. I am surprised this discussion still going on tbh, they will be looking for more than a good player (border line) all star so I don't envision them using the pick in a pkg with salary dumps. IMO it will be another swing for the fences type move so probably trading a starter and the pick for a "big 3" type which kinda takes us out of the possible scenarios.

I agree it is unlikely they trade the pick for Bledsoe for good basketball reasons. But it is a long off-season. And Cleveland is known for making stupid basketball decisions to appease the local kid.

I just think these discussions about Bledsoe to the Cavs are wishful thinking. They will look really stupid if they trade their newly acquired pick for such a marginal talent after just acquiring a new PG. You guys just want Bledsoe gone and are concocting trades that give you what you want.

Would y'all rather have our pick or the Brooklyn pick this year?

Split T wrote:Would y'all rather have our pick or the Brooklyn pick this year?

I'd prefer to have both.

Wally_West wrote:

Split T wrote:Would y'all rather have our pick or the Brooklyn pick this year?

I'd prefer to have both.

Who knows. That's why I like Wally's position.

I'd take Brooklyn's for two reasons.
1. I think they have less potential to be decent. They might not be terrible, but there is no way that pick drops out of the top 8. Our pick could end up 10-12.
2. If we had the Brooklyn pick instead of ours, we could just win games and Brooklyn could tank for us. This is the biggest reason I'd prefer the Brooklyn pick.

I think we are likely to be really, really bad again next season. I don't think Brooklyn is a good team, but they may win a few games by virtue of being in the very very crappy East. I don't know if I would be confident in which pick was better, but I don't think I would want to swap picks with them. I'd be too pissed off if we happened to give up the better pick. You just *know* that OGW would make that into a #1 pick that we traded away.

Split T wrote:I'd take Brooklyn's for two reasons.
1. I think they have less potential to be decent. They might not be terrible, but there is no way that pick drops out of the top 8. Our pick could end up 10-12.
2. If we had the Brooklyn pick instead of ours, we could just win games and Brooklyn could tank for us. This is the biggest reason I'd prefer the Brooklyn pick.

We're a bottom 5 team this year again. PF, SF positions are still terrible. Booker is a one way player. PG position is thin past the injury prone Bledsoe.

Wormwood wrote:

Split T wrote:I'd take Brooklyn's for two reasons.
1. I think they have less potential to be decent. They might not be terrible, but there is no way that pick drops out of the top 8. Our pick could end up 10-12.
2. If we had the Brooklyn pick instead of ours, we could just win games and Brooklyn could tank for us. This is the biggest reason I'd prefer the Brooklyn pick.

We're a bottom 5 team this year again. PF, SF positions are still terrible. Booker is a one way player. PG position is thin past the injury prone Bledsoe.

Is Brooklyn not? I'm not staying our pick is going to be 10-12, but I think it's possible. Bledsoe is solid, Booker will take another step forward. If Jackson is good and our young guys all improve, we could win 35 games and finish 10/11 in the West. I think it's more likely we struggle out the gate, eventually turn more to our youth and finish around 28 wins and bottom 3 in the West.

My main point though is that it's nice to be able to cheer for wins and not have to worry about how it affects our draft status.

Side note on how to solve tanking: What if the team with the worst record got to pick who's Draft slot they get in the upcoming draft. So Brooklyn had the worst record this last year and at some point before the season they would get first choice on who's pick they get. So let's say they take Atlanta's pick. They'd now pick in 2018 based on how Atlanta plays in the upcoming season. No team would have their own pick, so there'd be much less incentive to tank. Plus it could create some drama amongst teams who pick other teams to be bad.

Trades would be a little different. You'd be trading for the other teams place in the picking order. So Cleveland would actually get first choice. You could then just do away with the lottery completely and sort the draft solely on record.

What do y'all think? It still helps the lesser teams, but I think drastically decreases the motivation to tank. Good idea or am I just crazy?

Superbone wrote:

Wally_West wrote:

Split T wrote:Would y'all rather have our pick or the Brooklyn pick this year?

I'd prefer to have both.

Who knows. That's why I like Wally's position.

I agree with Wally's position too.

Split T wrote:

Wormwood wrote:

Split T wrote:I'd take Brooklyn's for two reasons.
1. I think they have less potential to be decent. They might not be terrible, but there is no way that pick drops out of the top 8. Our pick could end up 10-12.
2. If we had the Brooklyn pick instead of ours, we could just win games and Brooklyn could tank for us. This is the biggest reason I'd prefer the Brooklyn pick.

We're a bottom 5 team this year again. PF, SF positions are still terrible. Booker is a one way player. PG position is thin past the injury prone Bledsoe.

Is Brooklyn not? I'm not staying our pick is going to be 10-12, but I think it's possible. Bledsoe is solid, Booker will take another step forward. If Jackson is good and our young guys all improve, we could win 35 games and finish 10/11 in the West. I think it's more likely we struggle out the gate, eventually turn more to our youth and finish around 28 wins and bottom 3 in the West.

My main point though is that it's nice to be able to cheer for wins and not have to worry about how it affects our draft status.

Side note on how to solve tanking: What if the team with the worst record got to pick who's Draft slot they get in the upcoming draft. So Brooklyn had the worst record this last year and at some point before the season they would get first choice on who's pick they get. So let's say they take Atlanta's pick. They'd now pick in 2018 based on how Atlanta plays in the upcoming season. No team would have their own pick, so there'd be much less incentive to tank. Plus it could create some drama amongst teams who pick other teams to be bad.

Trades would be a little different. You'd be trading for the other teams place in the picking order. So Cleveland would actually get first choice. You could then just do away with the lottery completely and sort the draft solely on record.

What do y'all think? It still helps the lesser teams, but I think drastically decreases the motivation to tank. Good idea or am I just crazy?

Vegas has us at 500-1 odds to win the championship. They have brooklyn at 750-1. They also have us as likely the 2nd worst record in the league, *behind* the nets by 5 games. With Kings and Bulls closely following us.

https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/905876795219685380 You know if there is a way for the Suns to get fucked here it'll happen.