Phx-Suns.Net

How about this simple three way trade:

CLE gets Bledsoe, Dragic, Winslow.
MIA gets Kyrie.
PHX gets Shumpert and CLE's 1stR in 2021 (little to no protection).

Ugh. No. For taking on bad salary of a player we don't need and giving up our best player we need at least two nearly unprotected firsts, the way we did with Dragic.

I'm not that enthralled with Irving. Bled, Warren, 1st for Irving and Frye. Take it or leave it.

Ring_Wanted wrote:How about this simple three way trade:

CLE gets Bledsoe, Dragic, Winslow.
MIA gets Kyrie.
PHX gets Shumpert and CLE's 1stR in 2021 (little to no protection).

Banking on Cleveland being really stupid for a couple of years, eh?

Superbone wrote:

In2ition wrote:

iLLmatic wrote:

In2ition wrote:

iLLmatic wrote:
They want Josh Jackson.

And they can go pound sand. It's gotten to the point that no one is giving anything of value up for Irving, why should the Suns?

This is my stance as well. It's funny reading some of the Cavs fans comments.

Haha, yeah it is. They are convinced that the Suns will cave, because they did in the Wiggins/Love trade.

Call me crazy but I'd rather have Jackson than Wiggins right now.

I'm with you, Wiggins hasn't showed me he's gonna be any better than Rudy Gay.

Ring_Wanted wrote:How about this simple three way trade:

CLE gets Bledsoe, Dragic, Winslow.
MIA gets Kyrie.
PHX gets Shumpert and CLE's 1stR in 2021 (little to no protection).

Why? Bledsoe for Shumpert and a 2021 pick? Did Eric rape someone or something?

JCSunsfan wrote:

Ring_Wanted wrote:How about this simple three way trade:

CLE gets Bledsoe, Dragic, Winslow.
MIA gets Kyrie.
PHX gets Shumpert and CLE's 1stR in 2021 (little to no protection).

Why? Bledsoe for Shumpert and a 2021 pick? Did Eric rape someone or something?

Right? The Suns don't need to trade Bledsoe, he never asked to be moved.

Just been reading everyone's input the last couple weeks during the lull period lol but deciding to offer my lil take as I don't think I've seen this angle mentioned.

I like Kyrie and as most have said the concern about the fit with Booker is valid and I'm in the not adding in Josh but if we were to get the trade done leaving us with Kyrie-Booker-Josh core one of my main concerns is actually the media. As mentioned before most scenarios by analysts sucked for the Suns and I believe that's simply because most folks don't pay attention to us, Booker got some decent praise last season but on a whole like Chuck always is sure to mention nobody ain't looking for Suns on Primetime. I am cool with us flying under the radar and growing as a young unit but that will all change with Kyrie, hypothetically say we start 5-10 the media would be all over Kyrie and the debates on TV will all be if Kyrie made one of the worst decisions asking to leave LeBron yada yada
I would not want that possible national scrutiny and atmosphere around the team so that would be my concern because I don't think we would be "quietly" allowed to build chemistry under the radar and that could lead to more frustration in the locker room and so on

bajanguy008 wrote:Just been reading everyone's input the last couple weeks during the lull period lol but deciding to offer my lil take as I don't think I've seen this angle mentioned.

I like Kyrie and as most have said the concern about the fit with Booker is valid and I'm in the not adding in Josh but if we were to get the trade done leaving us with Kyrie-Booker-Josh core one of my main concerns is actually the media. As mentioned before most scenarios by analysts sucked for the Suns and I believe that's simply because most folks don't pay attention to us, Booker got some decent praise last season but on a whole like Chuck always is sure to mention nobody ain't looking for Suns on Primetime. I am cool with us flying under the radar and growing as a young unit but that will all change with Kyrie, hypothetically say we start 5-10 the media would be all over Kyrie and the debates on TV will all be if Kyrie made one of the worst decisions asking to leave LeBron yada yada
I would not want that possible national scrutiny and atmosphere around the team so that would be my concern because I don't think we would be "quietly" allowed to build chemistry under the radar and that could lead to more frustration in the locker room and so on

That's a good point. I don't know if anyone is really looking at the media scrutiny as a factor, but it would be good for the kids to fly under the radar and improve their weaknesses without constant national criticism.

Yeah, we're probably better off in the long run staying out of the whole Kyrie sweepstakes unless we are just a trade facilitator in a deal that helps our club.

bajanguy008 wrote:Just been reading everyone's input the last couple weeks during the lull period lol but deciding to offer my lil take as I don't think I've seen this angle mentioned.

I like Kyrie and as most have said the concern about the fit with Booker is valid and I'm in the not adding in Josh but if we were to get the trade done leaving us with Kyrie-Booker-Josh core one of my main concerns is actually the media. As mentioned before most scenarios by analysts sucked for the Suns and I believe that's simply because most folks don't pay attention to us, Booker got some decent praise last season but on a whole like Chuck always is sure to mention nobody ain't looking for Suns on Primetime. I am cool with us flying under the radar and growing as a young unit but that will all change with Kyrie, hypothetically say we start 5-10 the media would be all over Kyrie and the debates on TV will all be if Kyrie made one of the worst decisions asking to leave LeBron yada yada
I would not want that possible national scrutiny and atmosphere around the team so that would be my concern because I don't think we would be "quietly" allowed to build chemistry under the radar and that could lead to more frustration in the locker room and so on

I respect your take, bajanguy, but to me it feels like you are saying, "We should not try to make the team better because we might be criticized for it, and that would make us feel sad." To me this sounds like a fairly unambitious attitude toward running an NBA team. If the Suns can make a trade that makes our team better, we should do it.

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:

bajanguy008 wrote:Just been reading everyone's input the last couple weeks during the lull period lol but deciding to offer my lil take as I don't think I've seen this angle mentioned.

I like Kyrie and as most have said the concern about the fit with Booker is valid and I'm in the not adding in Josh but if we were to get the trade done leaving us with Kyrie-Booker-Josh core one of my main concerns is actually the media. As mentioned before most scenarios by analysts sucked for the Suns and I believe that's simply because most folks don't pay attention to us, Booker got some decent praise last season but on a whole like Chuck always is sure to mention nobody ain't looking for Suns on Primetime. I am cool with us flying under the radar and growing as a young unit but that will all change with Kyrie, hypothetically say we start 5-10 the media would be all over Kyrie and the debates on TV will all be if Kyrie made one of the worst decisions asking to leave LeBron yada yada
I would not want that possible national scrutiny and atmosphere around the team so that would be my concern because I don't think we would be "quietly" allowed to build chemistry under the radar and that could lead to more frustration in the locker room and so on

I respect your take, bajanguy, but to me it feels like you are saying, "We should not try to make the team better because we might be criticized for it, and that would make us feel sad." To me this sounds like a fairly unambitious attitude toward running an NBA team. If the Suns can make a trade that makes our team better, we should do it.

But it doesn't clearly make us better. It likely means we have a better iso scorer, but a far worse defender. I think he was saying that there are more concerns than just fit.

Superbone wrote:Yeah, we're probably better off in the long run staying out of the whole Kyrie sweepstakes unless we are just a trade facilitator in a deal that helps our club.

Exactly. Let's find a way to "help" them by making us better, not by taking a disgruntled player off their hands. And as much as I want to move on from Bledsoe, remember that he is arguable our best player, and has done every single thing your FO would want you to do in terms of off-court behavior/community support.

There is no way we are getting better as a facilitator. Moving one of the 2 best players in the deal for a question mark doesn't make the team better. At best its a wash if we get that kid from the Knicks, because its fairly unlikely that he is a 20/5/6 PG in 2 years when we are supposed to be competing.

I've sold myself on Irving, I 100% believe he is the right move for where we are right now. Yeah his defense is awful, but Bledsoe's is largely overrated so I'm not THAT concerned about it. Booker needs help on the offensive end, and that is harder to find than defensive role players. Irving is a top 5 offensive player in the league, its crazy to pass on that if we can get him w/o moving Jackson.

So you would expect a rookie to guard his guy, Kyrie's, and Booker's? We need someone that is not a liability on that end of the floor if we are giving up assets for him.

I would expect that Booker grows into a decent defender given the big help on offense arriving, so him and JJ can hide Kyrie. Bledsoe, Chriss and the Miami pick are not going to get a us a two-way All Star. So, is not about giving up assets, but how much of them for any given player AVAILABLE. The only thing about Kyrie at this price that turns me off is his lack of commitment, a two year rental is not what we need right now. Cleveland lost a lot of leverage after those comments and hopefully our FO make them pay for it, we are in no hurry to add a rental-Kyrie or trade Bledsoe, even if this turns out to be his highest value point.

Indy wrote:

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:

bajanguy008 wrote:Just been reading everyone's input the last couple weeks during the lull period lol but deciding to offer my lil take as I don't think I've seen this angle mentioned.

I like Kyrie and as most have said the concern about the fit with Booker is valid and I'm in the not adding in Josh but if we were to get the trade done leaving us with Kyrie-Booker-Josh core one of my main concerns is actually the media. As mentioned before most scenarios by analysts sucked for the Suns and I believe that's simply because most folks don't pay attention to us, Booker got some decent praise last season but on a whole like Chuck always is sure to mention nobody ain't looking for Suns on Primetime. I am cool with us flying under the radar and growing as a young unit but that will all change with Kyrie, hypothetically say we start 5-10 the media would be all over Kyrie and the debates on TV will all be if Kyrie made one of the worst decisions asking to leave LeBron yada yada
I would not want that possible national scrutiny and atmosphere around the team so that would be my concern because I don't think we would be "quietly" allowed to build chemistry under the radar and that could lead to more frustration in the locker room and so on

I respect your take, bajanguy, but to me it feels like you are saying, "We should not try to make the team better because we might be criticized for it, and that would make us feel sad." To me this sounds like a fairly unambitious attitude toward running an NBA team. If the Suns can make a trade that makes our team better, we should do it.

But it doesn't clearly make us better. It likely means we have a better iso scorer, but a far worse defender. I think he was saying that there are more concerns than just fit.

Yeah, I don't want to get a star just to get a star. We need to get the right star for our team. I don't think Kyrie is that guy for us.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:I would expect that Booker grows into a decent defender given the big help on offense arriving, so him and JJ can hide Kyrie. Bledsoe, Chriss and the Miami pick are not going to get a ut a two-way All Star, is not about giving up assets, but how much of them for any given player AVAILABLE. Th only thing about Kyrie at this price that turns me off is his lack of commitment, a two year rental is not what we need right now. Cleveland lost a lot of leverage after those comments and hopefully our FO make them pay for it, we are in no hurry to add a rental-Kyrie or trade Bledsoe, even if this turns out to be his highest value point.

And he has already come out and said he won't commit to a team.

Superbone wrote:

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:I would expect that Booker grows into a decent defender given the big help on offense arriving, so him and JJ can hide Kyrie. Bledsoe, Chriss and the Miami pick are not going to get a ut a two-way All Star, is not about giving up assets, but how much of them for any given player AVAILABLE. Th only thing about Kyrie at this price that turns me off is his lack of commitment, a two year rental is not what we need right now. Cleveland lost a lot of leverage after those comments and hopefully our FO make them pay for it, we are in no hurry to add a rental-Kyrie or trade Bledsoe, even if this turns out to be his highest value point.

And he has already come out and said he won't commit to a team.

This just doesn't bother me the way it seems to bother a lot of people. We have the same issue right now with Bledsoe so what's the difference? If we can do this without sacrificing Jackson this is a no brainer for me.

If Kyrie won't commit by next year then we flip him to one of the teams that he will sign with via sign and trade. I've got to believe he'd fetch more than Bledsoe anyway so he's a better trade chip to have.

Yeah, not even NY is in a hurry to go get him, why should we? At the very least, it save us from unnecessary drama. Bledsoe, Chriss and the Mia pick, if Cleveland can do better, kudos to them.

AbeVroman wrote:

Superbone wrote:

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:I would expect that Booker grows into a decent defender given the big help on offense arriving, so him and JJ can hide Kyrie. Bledsoe, Chriss and the Miami pick are not going to get a ut a two-way All Star, is not about giving up assets, but how much of them for any given player AVAILABLE. Th only thing about Kyrie at this price that turns me off is his lack of commitment, a two year rental is not what we need right now. Cleveland lost a lot of leverage after those comments and hopefully our FO make them pay for it, we are in no hurry to add a rental-Kyrie or trade Bledsoe, even if this turns out to be his highest value point.

And he has already come out and said he won't commit to a team.

This just doesn't bother me the way it seems to bother a lot of people. We have the same issue right now with Bledsoe so what's the difference? If we can do this without sacrificing Jackson this is a no brainer for me.

If Kyrie won't commit by next year then we flip him to one of the teams that he will sign with via sign and trade. I've got to believe he'd fetch more than Bledsoe anyway so he's a better trade chip to have.

Totally agreed, it's all about the asking price.