Phx-Suns.Net

Cap wrote:Len has proven nothing in the NBA.

He's impressed Ryan in volunteer workouts.

Those claiming the Suns have to address the 4/5 spots have to realize those spots have been addressed, internally. The 4 spot belongs to the Morris Twins, and they've gotten stronger over the summer. They're it for the foreseeable future. The five spot is Plumlee and Len, with Len developing into a difference-maker and a force, at least on the boards and in the defensive paint.

Moving Green, Ennis, Tucker, rights to the Bogdanovic, or future mid-to-late first round picks isn't likely to net the Suns a significant upgrade at the 4 or 5.

Superbone wrote:

INFORMER wrote:

Superbone wrote: I was just thinking how tough the West is and how it's going to only get better.

Actually, I think the West is going to be worse than it was last year. I don't think all 8 playoff teams will have 50+ wins.

Why do you think that? Worse because they're not as good or worse records because they're beating up on each other? What Western playoff teams from last year are going to be worse?

I think they'll beat up on each other more. I think the bottom half of the conference has improved to the extent that the top 8-10 teams won't be able to fatten up their records on bottom feeders.

I think Dallas, Houston, and Memphis (to a lesser extent) take a step back. And I don't think San Antonio will be as dominant in the regular season as they were last year.

INFORMER wrote:I don't see your point.

My point is that 5M isn't a lot of money (as far as NBA salaries in +2014/15 are concerned). When you say 5M for your 3rd string PF, it certainly sounds like too much. But all in, we have 15 guys under contract, and I don't think there is a strong case for any of them being overpaid. I think the closest one would be Zoran or Bledsoe, but the time for those arguments is the end of this season.

Having a 15 man roster with nobody on a shitty contract is a luxury we haven't had in a long time. And I figured you would be happiest about that on this board, since it gives us more flexibility than we have had in a long time.

That said, we certainly have a long way to go towards getting a top-tier front court player on our team...

Indy wrote:

INFORMER wrote:I don't see your point.

My point is that 5M isn't a lot of money (as far as NBA salaries in +2014/15 are concerned). When you say 5M for your 3rd string PF, it certainly sounds like too much. But all in, we have 15 guys under contract, and I don't think there is a strong case for any of them being overpaid. I think the closest one would be Zoran or Bledsoe, but the time for those arguments is the end of this season.

Having a 15 man roster with nobody on a shitty contract is a luxury we haven't had in a long time. And I figured you would be happiest about that on this board, since it gives us more flexibility than we have had in a long time.

That said, we certainly have a long way to go towards getting a top-tier front court player on our team...

That really has nothing to do with my original question.

I was essentially asking SF4L why he has Marcus as a third string PF. It wasn't a complaint about Marcus' contract.

I thought Dallas actually improved. Houston did lose Parsons. Not sure about Memphis.

For the most part, maybe their records won't be as good but I think the teams are just as good as last year with other teams getting better as well like you said.

INFORMER wrote:

Indy wrote:

INFORMER wrote:I don't see your point.

My point is that 5M isn't a lot of money (as far as NBA salaries in +2014/15 are concerned). When you say 5M for your 3rd string PF, it certainly sounds like too much. But all in, we have 15 guys under contract, and I don't think there is a strong case for any of them being overpaid. I think the closest one would be Zoran or Bledsoe, but the time for those arguments is the end of this season.

Having a 15 man roster with nobody on a shitty contract is a luxury we haven't had in a long time. And I figured you would be happiest about that on this board, since it gives us more flexibility than we have had in a long time.

That said, we certainly have a long way to go towards getting a top-tier front court player on our team...

That really has nothing to do with my original question.

I was essentially asking SF4L why he has Marcus as a third string PF. It wasn't a complaint about Marcus' contract.

Well, then stop being rationale, INF.

Indy wrote:

INFORMER wrote:

Indy wrote:

INFORMER wrote:I don't see your point.

My point is that 5M isn't a lot of money (as far as NBA salaries in +2014/15 are concerned). When you say 5M for your 3rd string PF, it certainly sounds like too much. But all in, we have 15 guys under contract, and I don't think there is a strong case for any of them being overpaid. I think the closest one would be Zoran or Bledsoe, but the time for those arguments is the end of this season.

Having a 15 man roster with nobody on a shitty contract is a luxury we haven't had in a long time. And I figured you would be happiest about that on this board, since it gives us more flexibility than we have had in a long time.

That said, we certainly have a long way to go towards getting a top-tier front court player on our team...

That really has nothing to do with my original question.

I was essentially asking SF4L why he has Marcus as a third string PF. It wasn't a complaint about Marcus' contract.

Well, then stop being rationale, INF.

What was INF's rational here?

How do you see our depth chart, INF?

Thanks Swing.

Indy wrote: But all in, we have 15 guys under contract, and I don't think there is a strong case for any of them being overpaid.

Not speaking about Marcus, but just in general, handing out a bad contract and justifying it by saying you didn't have a bad contract on the payroll before is a terrible way to run a team.

And I figured you would be happiest about that on this board, since it gives us more flexibility than we have had in a long time.

My happiness aside, the Suns won't have cap space next offseason and they currently don't have an open roster. So what flexibility are you referring to?

We are in a bit of a situation, similar to the '10-11 season, where we have what seems like a lot of "value" contracts, but because of a lot of positional redundancy, we're going to have a hard time justifying all of those contracts. Meaning, if you're giving Marcus enough minutes to justify his $5M, then PJ, Green and Warren will all see their contracts harder to justify. If IT2 is getting 28 minutes a game, then Archie, Zoran and Green are all getting squeezed for PT and don't have as much of an opportunity to show their worth. This matters more when you're viewing these players as assets, rather than how they contribute to wins, but it still matters.

Also, I'm not so sure how I feel about the "this contract will look good under the 2017 salary cap" argument. I'd rather we try and sign contracts that look good today and great in 2017 than "meh" today and "good" in 2017.

INFORMER wrote:

Indy wrote: But all in, we have 15 guys under contract, and I don't think there is a strong case for any of them being overpaid.

Not speaking about Marcus, but just in general, handing out a bad contract and justifying it by saying you didn't have a bad contract on the payroll before is a terrible way to run a team.

Not what I said. I said we don't have a single bad contract on our team. I can't remember the last that has happened for us.

Shabazz wrote:Also, I'm not so sure how I feel about the "this contract will look good under the 2017 salary cap" argument. I'd rather we try and sign contracts that look good today and great in 2017 than "meh" today and "good" in 2017.

I think it is a decent contract today, and will look very good in two years. But I get your point.

Indy wrote:Thanks Swing.

No problem - I dig malaprops.

INFORMER wrote:

Indy wrote:

And I figured you would be happiest about that on this board, since it gives us more flexibility than we have had in a long time.

My happiness aside, the Suns won't have cap space next offseason and they currently don't have an open roster. So what flexibility are you referring to?

The fact we have 15 movable contracts, and redundancy at 3 positions. We arguably have 3 of the top 10-12 PGs in the league, and we have several picks each year in the next couple drafts.

SwingMan wrote:

Indy wrote:Thanks Swing.

No problem - I dig malaprops.

Being in my line of work, I think I type "rationale" much more often than "rational."

I assume he means the ability to move guys because they aren't overpaid.

Superbone wrote:How do you see our depth chart, INF?

I don't really have a concrete idea how things will shakeout. I think Marcus might start while PJ serves his suspension. I think we may see no-center frontcourts like Tucker/Warren-Morris-Morris. I think Tolliver will get spot minutes, mostly when Marcus or Green are struggling. I think Warren might start the season out of the rotation.

Shabazz wrote:We are in a bit of a situation, similar to the '10-11 season, where we have what seems like a lot of "value" contracts, but because of a lot of positional redundancy, we're going to have a hard time justifying all of those contracts. Meaning, if you're giving Marcus enough minutes to justify his $5M, then PJ, Green and Warren will all see their contracts harder to justify. If IT2 is getting 28 minutes a game, then Archie, Zoran and Green are all getting squeezed for PT and don't have as much of an opportunity to show their worth. This matters more when you're viewing these players as assets, rather than how they contribute to wins, but it still matters.

Also, I'm not so sure how I feel about the "this contract will look good under the 2017 salary cap" argument. I'd rather we try and sign contracts that look good today and great in 2017 than "meh" today and "good" in 2017.

Assets on ice.

I think if there's a trade to be made, it'll be something like 2 or 3 for 1, with Ennis, Green and Tolliver the most likely to go first - something's got to give in that backcourt and any trade will likely be for a 4, IMO. Who that 4 is, I have no idea.

Indy wrote:

SwingMan wrote:

Indy wrote:Thanks Swing.

No problem - I dig malaprops.

Being in my line of work, I think I type "rationale" much more often than "rational."

I hear ya - I actually had to look up how to spell "malaprop".