Eric Bledsoe [RFA]

[MightyMoog]

Yeah. You're leaving 8 mil on the table for next year. It'll take 3 years of a max offer in 2015 to make up that money. So basically, either way you're making 48 or 49 million over the next 4 years. You either do 12/12/12/12 or 4/15/15/15. The catch is there is no guarantee you get a max deal next summer. This is getting stupid.

[INFORMER]

This is getting stupid.

It got to that point a long time ago.

[Cap]

I wonder what Bledsoe thinks of that?

1) "Maybe the rest of the world is right and I'm wrong."

2) "The Suns have turned everybody against me! I won't let them get away with this!"

[TOO]

Here's hoping he does.

Prefer to trade him if at all possible. Send him to the Cavs for Waiters/Thompson. If we cant have a superstar, might as well build the best possible depth.

[Ring_Wanted]

If he plays for the QO you need his consent to make a trade since he'd be losing his Bird rights. In that case, the team that gets him would need to have enough cap space the following year to avoid a mere rental. Among franchises where Bledsoe could potentially agree to stay, probably only LAL and NYK make sense from a roster and cap standpoint, and always keeping in mind that the returns for the Suns would have to be relatively scarce.

If you are not getting back a relevant asset (and probably you aren't) it may make more sense to just keep him for the season and see how things play out for all parties. You keep his rights and there's always time to make a move if he becomes a cancer or too much of a distraction.

However, he'd be incredibly stubborn and reckless if he left the money on the table, above all if the Suns are willing to go up a little more to say 13M per. Again, in my opinion his best option is getting a contract that makes him desirable to the franchises he covets, then discreetely engineering a trade with a franchise of his liking that satisfies the Suns as well. I don't have a lot of faith, though.

[Bruiser]

I wonder what Bledsoe thinks of that?

1) "Maybe the rest of the world is right and I'm wrong."

2) "The Suns have turned everybody against me! I won't let them get away with this!"

Must be 2 because he simply knows the Suns are using Free Agency against him...



Seriously, what the f*** does that mean?
Using free agency against him?
How is that even possible?



I just wish someone like Ari Gold could give Eric's agent one of his famous speeches ..

[ShelC]

I'm kind of over this whole thing. I still want Bleds on the team, but if this is going to be the tip of the iceberg with him/his agent, then it may be best to just cut ties.

I can't really blame Bledsoe (though it's easy too), I put the blame on his agent. Yea, Bleds could be his own man, take the reigns and say "I'm signing this deal" but he's taking the advice of his agent and letting him do his job, which most guys tend to do. Again, I think it all leads back to his agent's lack of experience and know-how. He's just coming off really poorly around the league and with other execs. Could backfire in a big way.

[Sunsfan4life]

If the Suns had a good S&T offer for Bleds, they probabaly would of done it already. I don't think anyone has offered him anything above the Suns offer, even in a S&T, so he hasn't signed.

I haven't even heard of him meeting with anyone other then Miami and I don't know if that was ever confirmed.

In order to trade him, they have to have someone willing to dance and teams seem to agree with Phoenix that he isn't worth more then what we have offered.

[ShelC]

I would love to get inside his agent's head. Does Rich Paul not know what the market is for this kind of player? Did he get caught up with LeBron and was too busy to go to work in securing an offer sheet for Bledsoe early in free agency? Does he think that being LeBron's agent gives him some kind of leverage/sway/power ?

Teams tend not to overpay for guards, especially ones that aren't their own. Bigs get overpaid routinely, but PG is a position where there's almost always an abundance of talent. And with RFA, a team will typically have to overpay to scare the original team off. So I really don't get the rationale here, unless they just want out of Phoenix and don't want to sign long term. But even, you take the money and force a trade later.

I don't know that there's any good that can come out of not signing the deal.

[LazarusLong]

Everywhere that I have seen articles or posts about this situation, the user comments are like 99% in favor of not raising our offer and sticking to the 4/48. Nobody wants to max this guy out.

You don't bid against yourself for a player you control. And essentially that's what the Suns would be doing to up the ante in any way. Bledsoe and his agent have painted themselves into a corner, and now whine about how the paint smells ...

[ShelC]

I wonder what any of the initial offers were, even before the season. Was it closer to 8mil per and he declined? Was it 10? Did we see the Lowry deal as market value and go with that offer in FA initially.

Just curious as to what our strategy was. You never want to lowball, but did we go with 40 over 4 at the start of free agency and then bump it up "in good faith" to 48? Did we not even put an offer out there as to not bid against ourselves?

[Mori Chu]

This Bledsoe negotiation shows how dumb players and agents really are. They think they deserve the sun, moon, and stars after playing well for 40 games. The whole idea of a "max contract" as a bragging right or a proof that a player is good, is silly. I have heard people say they wish there was no max contract, but I don't think that would fix it. It'd probably just make the overpaying of players even worse.

I know people say that the owners destroyed the players in the last CBA lockout negotiation, but I think the current system is much better and more fair. The NBA teams *should* make money. Some list came out of which teams are financially profitable, and people were hemming and hawing about how the Thunder made like $25-29 million last year. Why shouldn't that team make that kind of money, considering that they pay individual players more than half that each? Why are we so opposed to NBA teams actually making money and being profitable? How is it unfair to the players to pay them salaries that are "only" 100-300 times the salary of a working-class person?

[Ring_Wanted]

I have heard people say they wish there was no max contract, but I don't think that would fix it. It'd probably just make the overpaying of players even worse.

I agree with you. In theory a no limit system would make sure that LeBron and Durant get what they deserve, but it also punishes even harder those franchises that don't have a bonafide superstar and are held hostage by second rate stars if they don't want to be left with nothing, especially when negotiating the first unrestricted contract.

[Ring_Wanted]

I know people say that the owners destroyed the players in the last CBA lockout negotiation, but I think the current system is much better and more fair.

You want a fair system? Start by getting rid of the luxury tax.

[In2ition]

I proposed a system where they could designate one player per team that is their MAX player and could be paid any amount necessary, but only a max set number is assigned to their cap number. So, any amount above that number paid by the team, doesn't get counted against the cap or applied to the luxury tax. One thing that could also be added to this designation is that this contract isn't guaranteed and the team could cut the player and make them an unrestricted free agent. Perhaps a time period could be set to hold this 1 Max slot on the team and the salary is applied to the cap even if they aren't paying the player if they cut them. Now, you could pay two other players a Max contract, but it would severely limit what you could pay any of the rest of the team, using nearly similar CBA rules to what is given right now for the rest of the roster.

[sunset rubdown]

I know people say that the owners destroyed the players in the last CBA lockout negotiation, but I think the current system is much better and more fair.

You want a fair system? Start by getting rid of the luxury tax.

Well, R_W, that way you would have some Real Madrid or Barcelona (or Man United, Man City, PSG, Chelsea...) of the NBA (most probably Lakers and Knicks) who would have payrols of 200+ mil of dollars.

Spanish Primera is basically unwatched when those 2 teams usually finish a season with 30 pts more than a third team (Athletico from the last season is a exception of the rule).

I am perfectly fine with existence of the luxury tax.

[Ring_Wanted]

I know people say that the owners destroyed the players in the last CBA lockout negotiation, but I think the current system is much better and more fair.

You want a fair system? Start by getting rid of the luxury tax.

Well, R_W, that way you would have some Real Madrid or Barcelona (or Man United, Man City, PSG, Chelsea...) of the NBA (most probably Lakers and Knicks) who would have payrols of 200+ mil of dollars.

Spanish Primera is basically unwatched when those 2 teams usually finish a season with 30 pts more than a third team (Athletico from the last season is a exception of the rule).

I am perfectly fine with existence of the luxury tax.

`
Tsk tsk. Don't confuse removing the l-tax with lack of regulation/limits.

No luxury tax, as long as there is still a salary cap, means that you are restricted in the way you spend, so it is not Real Madrid.

Currently there are more severe limitations to teams that go past certain milestones, beyond the dollar based 'fine', which is one of the greatest achievements by the 2011 CBA. That's what you have to foment. Specific measures that take away the ability to add talent besides the rude money.

While you get rid of the L.tax.

It is an indirect tax by nature and such kind of taxes are inherently unfair to those who have less. And the truth, like everywhere else, is that in the NBA everybody doesn't have the same. Correcting this in order to create a level field is what the CBA should be all about first (and second, how to share the benefits).

The L-tax doesn't attack the essential problem, because some franchises are not scared at all while others have to be very careful with how they spend and how much. And sometimes as a result, teams have to make bad moves on purpose because to them money is a problem.

It doesn't matter how smart your man in charge actually is. Actually, the smarter (and the better players), the sooner you have to face the money problem.

In other words, without l.tax, contending becomes affordable to regular franchises.

[Dan H]

I think the only reason they have a luxury tax is because of cap exemptions. If they did away with those and went to more of a hard cap like the NFL, I could see not having a luxury tax. But then the players would crap their pants because contracts would become shorter or non-guaranteed.

[Sunsfan4life]

You know I do visit Real GM from time to time on situations like this, because they do have 2 or 3 guys who supposedly have ties to the suns and have broke some decent info.

Anyways, one of those guys says Bledsoe really wants no parts of "living" in Phoenix and had his heart set on returning to LA. I don't know wheather its the weather or what...but he doesn't want to live here. Supposedly he'd only live in Phoenix if they offered him the max or close to it and was said to be angling to sign an offer sheet with the Lakers once Free agency began and before the Lakers pissed away all their money.

The hold up? Phoenix threaten to tie the Lakers money up and possibly even extend it passed the 3 day window with physicals and health checks (not sure what this means..just telling you what is written). So the Lakers went in another direction. This could be the basis of Bledsoe's "Their using RFA against me" Statement. Now apparently He has no other offers or interested teams and doesn't want to return to Phoenix and Phoenix doesn't want him back for anything other then 4/48. If someone offers a good sign and trade Phoenix would be interested but nobody will and nobody, this was in bold letters, would ever give Bledsoe the max or close to it AND give up assets. No way.

The guy goes on to say The situation won't be resolved any time soon, but its looking like Bledsoe's only out is taking the Suns 4/48 offer. He also states Phoenix thinks that Bledsoe's 4/48 deal would be very moveable and if thinks do not go right he'd bring back a bigger return at the deadline then he would right now.

The poster is that "Nottraxxe" guy over at realgm, he's been right about things before.

This would explain a little more why Bledsoe is mad at the organization if he thinks we scared away his dream destination. Tough sh!t

[ShelC]

Middle of the season we can trade him for Lin/Nash and Hill.