Phx-Suns.Net

Bradley is gonna get paid next year, I don't want to spend the money on him. Crowder has a nice deal, he makes some sense, but I'd rather give those minutes to Jackson and Warren. Smart is who I'd be most interested in, I don't like that he can't shoot though.

Problem is Boston wants assets in return. I'd rather just keep our assets.

They're not in a position to ask for a lot - they've got themselves over a barrel by agreeing to give Hayward the max without having enough room for it yet.

If we were the only team in contention I'd agree, but I'm sure there are teams that would love Crowder, Smart, or Bradley. I'm surprised Utah doesn't just take one of them in a sign and trade with Hayward.

I really like Hayward game and the changes to his body last season really helped his scoring but in saying that I thought Celtics were in a more flexible position. Now in reading that they have to give up key assets cause of this trade not quite sure if that is such a good deal

It's weird to have Hayward announce that he's joining the Celtics when they don't yet have the cap room to actually sign him. Now aren't the Celtics in a bad negotiating position on these deals they need to strike?

I want no part of Crowder; he's mediocre and will get in the way of Jackson and Warren. We are set at SF. I don't really like Smart, either; what good is a guard who shoots so poorly? Bradley is a very nice player, but he's due a payday and plays the same position as Booker, so I don't see why we would surrender any asset to get him.

Overall the Celtics roster is full of a lot of "B-minus" players who don't really move the needle. These are exactly the kind of guys that ruin a team's cap, when they get signed to a $15 million deal when they probably actually deserve a $5-7 million deal or whatever. I want our Suns to avoid such players so we aren't tempted to overpay them. I also don't want veterans blocking our young guys.

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:It's weird to have Hayward announce that he's joining the Celtics when they don't yet have the cap room to actually sign him. Now aren't the Celtics in a bad negotiating position on these deals they need to strike?

I want no part of Crowder; he's mediocre and will get in the way of Jackson and Warren. We are set at SF. I don't really like Smart, either; what good is a guard who shoots so poorly? Bradley is a very nice player, but he's due a payday and plays the same position as Booker, so I don't see why we would surrender any asset to get him.

Overall the Celtics roster is full of a lot of "B-minus" players who don't really move the needle. These are exactly the kind of guys that ruin a team's cap, when they get signed to a $15 million deal when they probably actually deserve a $5-7 million deal or whatever. I want our Suns to avoid such players so we aren't tempted to overpay them. I also don't want veterans blocking our young guys.

Too late

I just don't understand why so many people on other boards want us to trade for forwards. I keep seeing them put up trades that bring back some vet forward. If things go as planned there won't even be minutes for Dudley. Why bring in a vet forward that might increase your wins by a couple while slowing down the rebuild. Just confuses me.

Indy wrote:

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:It's weird to have Hayward announce that he's joining the Celtics when they don't yet have the cap room to actually sign him. Now aren't the Celtics in a bad negotiating position on these deals they need to strike?

I want no part of Crowder; he's mediocre and will get in the way of Jackson and Warren. We are set at SF. I don't really like Smart, either; what good is a guard who shoots so poorly? Bradley is a very nice player, but he's due a payday and plays the same position as Booker, so I don't see why we would surrender any asset to get him.

Overall the Celtics roster is full of a lot of "B-minus" players who don't really move the needle. These are exactly the kind of guys that ruin a team's cap, when they get signed to a $15 million deal when they probably actually deserve a $5-7 million deal or whatever. I want our Suns to avoid such players so we aren't tempted to overpay them. I also don't want veterans blocking our young guys.

Too late

Speaking of B-minus players, any word on Len?

Hey if he wants 5/35 I would keep him. A bargain is a bargain.

Ring_Wanted wrote:Hey if he wants 5/35 I would keep him. A bargain is a bargain.

I think we are limited to the number of 5 years contracts we can hand over the duration of such given contracts, guessing the current number is 2. I clearly remember that it used to be one, because the Wolves screw it badly giving it to Rubio, and that was the beginning of the end with the Love cycle in Minnesota.

And on top of that, a true bargain would be 3 /21, five years are a LOT of time to carry his contract if he keeps his current level or never grows beyond fringe starter on a contending team (I would say he is currently a fringe starter in a lottery team). Even at 7mill, if he never delivers what is needed, he just would be on the way of better players to draft or sign in the near future, and that before you start considering that Chriss and Bender could use better that minutes next year. I deeply prefer watch an struggling Bender that more mediocre Len.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:

Ring_Wanted wrote:Hey if he wants 5/35 I would keep him. A bargain is a bargain.

I think we are limited to the number of 5 years contracts we can hand over the duration of such given contracts, guessing the current number is 2. I clearly remember that it used to be one, because the Wolves screw it badly giving it to Rubio, and that was the beginning of the end with the Love cycle in Minnesota.

And on top of that, a true bargain would be 3 /21, five years are a LOT of time to carry his contract if he keeps his current level or never grows beyond fringe starter on a contending team (I would say he is currently a fringe starter in a lottery team). Even at 7mill, if he never delivers what is needed, he just would be on the way of better players to draft or sign in the near future, and that before you start considering that Chriss and Bender could use better that minutes next year. I deeply prefer watch an struggling Bender that more mediocre Len.

4/30 would be ok to me.

I'd go 3 years 30 or so. If/when we move Chandler we'll have no size on the roster. Len hasn't been great, but he's serviceable. And i'd rather go bigger money for less years. That seems to be the trend now anyway and the money is so dumb that players are more than willing to take it.

I'd be comfortable with 3/30 if he could catch or dunk a basketball in traffic.

carey wrote:I'd be comfortable with 3/30 if he could catch or dunk a basketball in traffic.

If he could do that someone would give him 4/60.

Remember Robin Lopez. We gave up on him at just the wrong time. I think we should keep Len because big men take longer and he's shown promise and improvement. I think if we sign him for 2-3 more years, he'll grow and improve a lot during that time. I don't want to break the bank, but around $10-12 mil a year is fine for him.

I think we should stop using Robin Lopez as an example for the Suns giving up too early on a prospect. He's an OK player. Has been for the last several years. Doesn't move the needle much. I'm not sweating the fact that we don't pay Robin Lopez $15M a year to give us 12 and 6.

Shabazz wrote:I think we should stop using Robin Lopez as an example for the Suns giving up too early on a prospect. He's an OK player. Has been for the last several years. Doesn't move the needle much. I'm not sweating the fact that we don't pay Robin Lopez $15M a year to give us 12 and 6.

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:Remember Robin Lopez. We gave up on him at just the wrong time. I think we should keep Len because big men take longer and he's shown promise and improvement. I think if we sign him for 2-3 more years, he'll grow and improve a lot during that time. I don't want to break the bank, but around $10-12 mil a year is fine for him.

I'm sorry but that's just not true. Show me one area that he's improved in instead of regressing in since his 2nd year. Yes, big men take longer to develop but some never develop & hope that you buy that line so they can gouge you for a $70M deal.

Shabazz wrote:I think we should stop using Robin Lopez as an example for the Suns giving up too early on a prospect. He's an OK player. Has been for the last several years. Doesn't move the needle much. I'm not sweating the fact that we don't pay Robin Lopez $15M a year to give us 12 and 6.

Amen.

But at the same time, Robin for 5M per (which is what NOP and Portland had) is nice. If I can get Len for the equivalent today (say, up to 8 M per?), I am all ears because this is the league where Miles Plumlee, Mozgov, Mahinmi, etc, are making between 50% and 100% more. Truth is Len has showed very little over a four year period, so if he wants more than a 'revised' MLE deal, by all means go for it (although nobody has showed any interest so far).

Just don't let Big Sauce go. I am supre high on his game. I think he is pretty underrated if he is seen as just a rebounder (which btw is what Chandler amounts to at this point, and we'd be wise to move him while those rebound %s are still fresh).

carey wrote:

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:Remember Robin Lopez. We gave up on him at just the wrong time. I think we should keep Len because big men take longer and he's shown promise and improvement. I think if we sign him for 2-3 more years, he'll grow and improve a lot during that time. I don't want to break the bank, but around $10-12 mil a year is fine for him.

I'm sorry but that's just not true. Show me one area that he's improved in instead of regressing in since his 2nd year. Yes, big men take longer to develop but some never develop & hope that you buy that line so they can gouge you for a $70M deal.

http://www.espn.com/nba/player/stats/_/ ... 7/alex-len

His stats regressed slightly last year, but that's partly because we signed Chandler to steal his minutes. He went down by 3 minutes per game from 23.3 to 20.3. That's a lot. If we had actually given him a starting/major role, his numbers would have gone up.