Suns pursuing free agent Blake Griffin

[carey]

I wouldn't worry too much guys. I'm 99% sure that if he leaves the Clippers he's going to sign with Miami.

Is this some sort of reverse psychology because you actually want him?

No. I legitimately think he winds up in Miami.

[Split T]

Rumor is Blake reached out to US. Couple this with hi randomly naming us as a good city to play in and apparent relationship with Bledsoe (played together in LA) and its a good look for us. Still don't see it making a ton of sense for either side, but whatever

Ya, I have mixed feelings about it. It's a risky move, but I'm kind of excited by the potential. Bledsoe-Booker-Jackson-Griffin-Chriss with Ulis-Reed-Warren-Bender-Williams off the bench. I think you'd have to move Chandler and Dudley if you still expect Bender to get minutes. You'd probably have to move one of them anyways to clear enough space. I'd love to replace Bledsoe with a better shooter in that lineup, someone like Gary Harris comes to mind, but I doubt we'd do that.

[iLLmatic]

The title should be Blake pursuing Suns. Whether he's trying to squeeze the clippers for the super max and using us for posturing, who knows? I'm intrigued pairing him with Booker and Jackson, however, I think he kills the rebuild effort so I hope the Suns are doing their due diligence. We dodged two bullets with Aldridge and Eric gordon; our management still scares me regarding their ability constructing a team.

[Split T]

One interesting idea, if we do sign Griffin, would you make a play for PG13? What would we have to give up? Warren and the Miami picks? Would we have to include Bender?

Bled/Booker/PG13/Griffin/Chandler
Ulis/Reed/Jackson/Bender/Chriss

We'd have a right now lineup and a bench unit of the future.

[carey]

PG said he'd only re-sign in Cleveland, Boston and L.A. I wouldn't do the one year rental thing and give up all our assets.

[Split T]

PG said he'd only re-sign in Cleveland, Boston and L.A. I wouldn't do the one year rental thing and give up all our assets.

Has PG actually said anything other than he's leaving Indiana? I guess it depends on what we'd have to give up. I really don't know what offers are out there, but I'd have no problem moving Warren and the Miami picks for 1 year of PG13. I'd take the chance that a big season with bled/Booker/George/Griffin would keep him here.

[In2ition]

PG said he'd only re-sign in Cleveland, Boston and L.A. I wouldn't do the one year rental thing and give up all our assets.

Has PG actually said anything other than he's leaving Indiana? I guess it depends on what we'd have to give up. I really don't know what offers are out there, but I'd have no problem moving Warren and the Miami picks for 1 year of PG13. I'd take the chance that a big season with bled/Booker/George/Griffin would keep him here.

Heck, make a play for Jordan too if that happens. Trade Knight, Chandler, Dudley, Barbosa...idk.

[Shabazz]

Separate from the injury concerns and timeline fit, no one seems to be mentioning that this may not be a great fit for basketball reasons. With Bledsoe, Jackson, Warren, Chandler and/or Williams all expected to be a big part of the rotation, our spacing is already suspect. Bender and Ulis are unproven from long range. DJJ's range extends as far as the rim. Adding Griffin to that group just clogs the floor even more.

You can't win in this league anymore if the 3-pointer is not a big part of your offense. If Marquese Chriss is your 3rd best 3 point shooter (and Davon Reed your second!), you're in trouble.

[Split T]

Separate from the injury concerns and timeline fit, no one seems to be mentioning that this may not be a great fit for basketball reasons. With Bledsoe, Jackson, Warren, Chandler and/or Williams all expected to be a big part of the rotation, our spacing is already suspect. Bender and Ulis are unproven from long range. DJJ's range extends as far as the rim. Adding Griffin to that group just clogs the floor even more.

You can't win in this league anymore if the 3-pointer is not a big part of your offense. If Marquese Chriss is your 3rd best 3 point shooter (and Davon Reed your second!), you're in trouble.

I think we have the same spacing issue whether we sign Griffin or not, unless we were planning to play Dudley 25 minutes a game.

[Indy]

Separate from the injury concerns and timeline fit, no one seems to be mentioning that this may not be a great fit for basketball reasons. With Bledsoe, Jackson, Warren, Chandler and/or Williams all expected to be a big part of the rotation, our spacing is already suspect. Bender and Ulis are unproven from long range. DJJ's range extends as far as the rim. Adding Griffin to that group just clogs the floor even more.

You can't win in this league anymore if the 3-pointer is not a big part of your offense. If Marquese Chriss is your 3rd best 3 point shooter (and Davon Reed your second!), you're in trouble.

I think we have the same spacing issue whether we sign Griffin or not, unless we were planning to play Dudley 25 minutes a game.

Fair point.

[Shabazz]

Also, he once pummeled his good friend/the Clippers trainer in the face, breaking his hand in the process. Using Wormwood math, that means he'll likely mow down 4-7 hitchhikers with his Range Rover per year going forward.

[TOO]

Also, he once pummeled his good friend/the Clippers trainer in the face, breaking his hand in the process. Using Wormwood math, that means he'll likely mow down 4-7 hitchhikers with his Range Rover per year going forward.

100/10.

[In2ition]

Also, he once pummeled his good friend/the Clippers trainer in the face, breaking his hand in the process. Using Wormwood math, that means he'll likely mow down 4-7 hitchhikers with his Range Rover per year going forward.

10/10 That had me crying.

[Ring_Wanted]

Ya, we can create the space pretty easy. The real question is whether we should.

Chandler (and obviously, Knight if possible). If Griffin came here, there's a chance I'd want to keep Len.

[Superbone]

Also, he once pummeled his good friend/the Clippers trainer in the face, breaking his hand in the process. Using Wormwood math, that means he'll likely mow down 4-7 hitchhikers with his Range Rover per year going forward.

100/10.

[O_Gardino]

To me, bringing in a win now vet could be a good part of the rebuild. You have to establish winning culture and winning expectations. If you have guys who you think are stars, let them grow up on a playoff team, not a bottom feeder. So, unless we think we really need one more high lotto pick, I'm not opposed to bringing in a star to elevate the squad.

It just has to be the right star.

I would want a star who has a high bball IQ and great on court leadership. Someone who can continue to be a good teammate and mentor, even when he is no longer the best player on the team. Blake for sure has the on court IQ. But I don't think he is the teammate we want, plus for certain sure he will be a nonfactor 1 or 2 years from now.

And how does the offense work with Watson / Bledsoe / Griffin? It just seams like a mismatch to me.

[Split T]

For those against Griffin, what are your reasons why?

The negatives in my opinion:

1. He makes us a 4/5 seed but not a real contender.

Probably true. I would argue that we don't know how good we'd be with Blake Griffin, it's possible that the pieces fit just right and we see great improvement from our young guys. Blake and JJ's play making take pressure off Bled and Blake/Booker allow Bled to be a 3rd option. Would you sign him if it meant we grab the 3 seed and play the rockets for the chance to lose to the warriors?

2. Blake gets in the way of our young guys.

I don't think this is necessarily the case. Signing Blake means we move on from Len and probably Dudley and maybe Chandler. We don't have to give up anything of value to bring Blake in. We try to win now and still keep all our young guys for the future.

3. Blake might never be healthy.

I think this is a fair point, however we don't lose much except money if he can't stay healthy. The real question is what free agents in future years would we be missing out on. Who should we save our cap space for?

Here is the top free agents for the next few years:

2018:
Chris Paul - He's not coming here
Russell Westbrook - Has a player option, might sign an extension this summer with OKC
Isaiah Thomas - Not coming back
Paul George - Probably LA bound
Lebron - Cavs or LA
LaMarcus Aldridge - I hope not
DeMarcus Cousins
Will Barton - Nice player, not a difference maker.
DeAndre - No thanks
Brook Lopez - Pass
Greg Monroe - Pass
2014 Rookie Class(Wiggins, Parker, Embiid) - Restricted

2019
Carmelo - No thanks
Dwight - Pass
Klay - Would he come here?
John Wall - Bled replacement
Tobias Harris - Eh
Ricky Rubio - Maybe if he learns to shoot
Nik Vucevic - Eh
Kemba
Jokic - Surprisingly unrestricted, unless the site was wrong
2015 Draft class(KAT, KP, Russell) - restricted

2020
Harden
Horford
Whiteside
Kawhi
Barnes
Love
Gasol
Kyrie
Butler
Dragic
Draymond
Middleton

2018 doesn't have anything appealing to me, I'd rather spend the money on Blake.
2019 has a couple interesting names but we could sign Blake and still have space that year as Bled/Chandler/Dudley all come off the books
2020 seems to be the year to have cap space. This is why I'd love to sign Blake to a 3 year deal. He'd be off our books and we could either bring him back or go after a new target.

[O_Gardino]

For those against Griffin, what are your reasons why?

The negatives in my opinion:

1. He makes us a 4/5 seed but not a real contender.

Probably true. I would argue that we don't know how good we'd be with Blake Griffin, it's possible that the pieces fit just right and we see great improvement from our young guys. Blake and JJ's play making take pressure off Bled and Blake/Booker allow Bled to be a 3rd option. Would you sign him if it meant we grab the 3 seed and play the rockets for the chance to lose to the warriors?

2. Blake gets in the way of our young guys.

I don't think this is necessarily the case. Signing Blake means we move on from Len and probably Dudley and maybe Chandler. We don't have to give up anything of value to bring Blake in. We try to win now and still keep all our young guys for the future.

3. Blake might never be healthy.

I think this is a fair point, however we don't lose much except money if he can't stay healthy. The real question is what free agents in future years would we be missing out on. Who should we save our cap space for?

Here is the top free agents for the next few years:

2018:
Chris Paul - He's not coming here
Russell Westbrook - Has a player option, might sign an extension this summer with OKC
Isaiah Thomas - Not coming back
Paul George - Probably LA bound
Lebron - Cavs or LA
LaMarcus Aldridge - I hope not
DeMarcus Cousins
Will Barton - Nice player, not a difference maker.
DeAndre - No thanks
Brook Lopez - Pass
Greg Monroe - Pass
2014 Rookie Class(Wiggins, Parker, Embiid) - Restricted

2019
Carmelo - No thanks
Dwight - Pass
Klay - Would he come here?
John Wall - Bled replacement
Tobias Harris - Eh
Ricky Rubio - Maybe if he learns to shoot
Nik Vucevic - Eh
Kemba
Jokic - Surprisingly unrestricted, unless the site was wrong
2015 Draft class(KAT, KP, Russell) - restricted

2020
Harden
Horford
Whiteside
Kawhi
Barnes
Love
Gasol
Kyrie
Butler
Dragic
Draymond
Middleton

2018 doesn't have anything appealing to me, I'd rather spend the money on Blake.
2019 has a couple interesting names but we could sign Blake and still have space that year as Bled/Chandler/Dudley all come off the books
2020 seems to be the year to have cap space. This is why I'd love to sign Blake to a 3 year deal. He'd be off our books and we could either bring him back or go after a new target.

0. You didn't address the character issues. Seems like he's a POS, and that matters.
1. The goal is to contend, not to make the playoffs. You bring in a good veteran if he helps you win enough now that your young guys grow into contender later. You bring in a win now guy then blow it up if he doesn't win you enough. It's not really about what seed we would be this year or next year. It's about contending 6 years from now.
2. We aren't worried about Blake taking Len's spot on the roster. We want to make sure we don't increase our logjam and pin Bender / Chriss to the bench. If we bring in a win now vet, I would want it to be someone who can share the floor our young guys 1-4.
3. Blake has been the healthiest he will ever be.
4. Right now, in this era of the NBA, big men don't elevate teams. How many bigs are stars on teams that drafted them, then go to another team and elevate that team? Please name them. I'm going to say Horford and that's the only one I can think of. Bosh moved and was worse. Love moved and was worse. Aldridge moved and didn't amount to much on that squad. Amare moved and was worse. I'm sorry, but bigs aren't how you win right now. If Blake comes here, we are going to be looking at 15 points, 8 rebounds, and 3 assists. I don't want to spend max money for that.

Edit: I originally said Millsap, but I meant Horford.

[Split T]

0. You didn't address the character issues. Seems like he's a POS, and that matters.
1. The goal is to contend, not to make the playoffs. You bring in a good veteran if he helps you win enough now that your young guys grow into contender later. You bring in a win now guy then blow it up if he doesn't win you enough. It's not really about what seed we would be this year or next year. It's about contending 6 years from now.
2. We aren't worried about Blake taking Len's spot on the roster. We want to make sure we don't increase our logjam and pin Bender / Chriss to the bench. If we bring in a win now vet, I would want it to be someone who can share the floor our young guys 1-4.
3. Blake has been the healthiest he will ever be.
4. Right now, in this era of the NBA, big men don't elevate teams. How many bigs are stars on teams that drafted them, then go to another team and elevate that team? Please name them. I'm going to say Millsap and that's the only one I can think of. Bosh moved and was worse. Love moved and was worse. Aldridge moved and didn't amount to much on that squad. Amare moved and was worse. I'm sorry, but bigs aren't how you win right now. If Blake comes here, we are going to be looking at 15 points, 8 rebounds, and 3 assists. I don't want to spend max money for that.

0. He's had 1 character issue concern his whole career. Im not worried about that.
1. My point is bringing in Griffin in no way hampers our ability to contend in the future. He makes us better right now without compromising any of our youth. Outside chance he makes us a contender. I don't think anyone is beating GS, but crazier things have happened.
2. My point was our big rotation is going to be Blake/Chriss/Bender/Williams or Chandler. Plenty of minutes still for Chriss and Bender
3. We don't know that. Grant Hill spent most of his career injured and then was about as healthy as you can get when he played here.
4. I don't really understand your point here. Bosh and Love both took lesser roles when they moved. Amare had injury issues and you're right, Aldridge played worse. Why does the big have to change teams? What about AD, KAT, KP, Antetokounmpo, Embiid, Jokic? You don't think they will help their teams win? Blake has averaged 22/8/5 three years in a row, he's not gonna come here and average 15/8/3. If we were smart, we'd let him run the offense a lot of the time and if he's healthy, he could put up 22/10/6 numbers.

[jonh]

4. Right now, in this era of the NBA, big men don't elevate teams. How many bigs are stars on teams that drafted them, then go to another team and elevate that team? Please name them. I'm going to say Millsap and that's the only one I can think of. Bosh moved and was worse. Love moved and was worse. Aldridge moved and didn't amount to much on that squad. Amare moved and was worse. I'm sorry, but bigs aren't how you win right now. If Blake comes here, we are going to be looking at 15 points, 8 rebounds, and 3 assists. I don't want to spend max money for that.

Kevin Durant?
Lebron James (SF/PF)

To me, those 2 names are all you need, right? Not saying that we should sign him, especially because of Blake's particular injury history and attitude but I am not sure if the best argument is that the movement of big men don't matter.