Phx-Suns.Net

Ring_Wanted wrote: In my opinion 3 years is not fair to the player, especially after being dirty cheap for two seasons. This is probably his only relevant NBA contract and I think he has earned a 4 year commitment from the Suns.

I don't agree at all. He was dirty cheap because he was out of the league, and rightfully so. I don't think any role player has "earned" a 4 year commitment from their team unless they've been a proven cog in a winning situation for 3 or more years.

Ring_Wanted wrote:

INFORMER wrote:

Mori Chu wrote:What do you guys think is a fair deal for Tucker? 3yrs/$12m?

I'd prefer a deal between $3.5-4.5 million annually, and no more than 3 years guaranteed. If he get s an offer for $5 million annually, I would be tempted to let him go. Then I 'd talk to Charlotte about acquiring MKG.

He. Our posts couldn't be more similar. Certainly a long way from those 2M per, right?

Did I ever go that low? I thought I've been in the $3 million range since the we first started talking about Tucker's next contract.

Agreed... He was dirt cheap for a reason. Its not like he took less money to play in Phoenix. The suns turned him into an NBA player and it was a situation that provided playing time and this year the staff really gave him freedom to shoot on offense

INFORMER wrote: Did I ever go that low? I thought I've been in the $3 million range since the we first started talking about Tucker's next contract.

You did, on realgm. I don't remember the exact figure, but it was 2.XM for sure.

And yes, we gave him his first opportunity, but you know how things work in the NBA. His play has more than exceeded the money he has made and that is a factor when discussing a new contract. His age is also an issue, that's why I suggested a partial guarantee for the 4th year. Find a figure both the team and the player like over three years and share the risk in the end.

It sounds like the market is going to set the price. I'd like the Suns to make a preemptive offer but it appears that Tucker's agent wants to wait and see what other teams' best offers are first.

INFORMER wrote:

Ring_Wanted wrote: In my opinion 3 years is not fair to the player, especially after being dirty cheap for two seasons. This is probably his only relevant NBA contract and I think he has earned a 4 year commitment from the Suns.

I don't agree at all. He was dirty cheap because he was out of the league, and rightfully so. I don't think any role player has "earned" a 4 year commitment from their team unless they've been a proven cog in a winning situation for 3 or more years.

This. We already pay him with a chance to showcase his talents, if he can't apreciate it and is looking to squeeze every single penny posible, then he is all about the money. His contract is not in a vacuum, it counts against a salary cap, and therefore, 4mill a year or more, will take us to another Channing Frye situation: Nice character guy, not a stiff but with only one true useful skill, liked by most, but on a contract that's over his contributions. And now he is our Go-to-guy in trades and salary dumps.

I was not making Tucker similar to Marion for us, but making a case for him to look at as a reference on failing to recognize a good situation and leaving it because is not "perfect" (on his case, the imperfection would be leaving some money at the table in order to stay)

Don't get me wrong, Tucker has every right go and get the most money he can. I wouldn't hold it against him. But I'm not going to sit here and act like he's "earned" or deserves a contract that he isn't really worth, or that the Suns should be obligated to meet his demands.

Money is going to be a huge temptation for Tucker as he's never made the real NBA green before. I don't fault him for that. I think it will hurt the Suns a lot more than many of you think if we lose him next year. Yeah, he's not a perfect player and tries to do too much on the break but he is currently the heart and soul of the team.

Ring_Wanted wrote:

INFORMER wrote: Did I ever go that low? I thought I've been in the $3 million range since the we first started talking about Tucker's next contract.

You did, on realgm. I don't remember the exact figure, but it was 2.XM for sure.

I think I might have said I would start his range at $2.5 million, but I know I didn't say $2 million was as high as I would go. I think stated back then that I would be uncomfortable with a annual salary over $4 million.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:We already pay him with a chance to showcase his talents, if he can't apreciate it and is looking to squeeze every single penny posible, then he is all about the money.

Why are you assuming things at this point? There is a whole summer to find out what he is about. Right now we are trying to determine what he is worth from a neutral standpoint. In my opinion 4M per is not crazy. More than the ideal amount but doable. If his agent goes out there gets him 5M+ and the player says 'give me the this or I leave', I've already said that he'd be gone if it was up to me. But between that scenario and a lowball offer (not implying that's what you are saying, suggesting or advocating it) there is room for negotiation, as long as both parties want to move from their initial stance, which is what I want to see done.

INFORMER wrote:

Ring_Wanted wrote:

INFORMER wrote: Did I ever go that low? I thought I've been in the $3 million range since the we first started talking about Tucker's next contract.

You did, on realgm. I don't remember the exact figure, but it was 2.XM for sure.

I think I might have said I would start his range at $2.5 million, but I know I didn't say $2 million was as high as I would go. I think stated back then that I would be uncomfortable with a annual salary over $4 million.

Bah, don't give it more thought. Plain 2M is not what you said, that's for sure too.

Ring_Wanted wrote:

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:We already pay him with a chance to showcase his talents, if he can't apreciate it and is looking to squeeze every single penny posible, then he is all about the money.

Why are you assuming things at this point? There is a whole summer to find out what he is about. Right now we are trying to determine what he is worth from a neutral standpoint. In my opinion 4M per is not crazy. More than the ideal amount but doable. If his agent goes out there gets him 5M+ and the player says 'give me the this or I leave', I've already said that he'd be gone if it was up to me. But between that scenario and a lowball offer (not implying that's what you are saying, suggesting or advocating it) there is room for negotiation, as long as both parties want to move from their initial stance, which is what I want to see done.

That seems reasonable to me. I'd hope that PJ is willing to give us a little bit of a discount to stay.

Ring_Wanted wrote:

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:We already pay him with a chance to showcase his talents, if he can't apreciate it and is looking to squeeze every single penny posible, then he is all about the money.

Why are you assuming things at this point? There is a whole summer to find out what he is about. Right now we are trying to determine what he is worth from a neutral standpoint. In my opinion 4M per is not crazy. More than the ideal amount but doable. If his agent goes out there gets him 5M+ and the player says 'give me the this or I leave', I've already said that he'd be gone if it was up to me. But between that scenario and a lowball offer (not implying that's what you are saying, suggesting or advocating it) there is room for negotiation, as long as both parties want to move from their initial stance, which is what I want to see done.

I'm not making any affirmation, and as a matter of fact, we are all asumming things as we speak our own scenarios.

And to be fair, we are "only" one million apart in our valoration for players on Tucker's rank. To talk about Tony Allen when he signed his last contract, as a reference for Tucker's new contract, is talking about a player consistently capable of shutting down the best opposing player, during several years, AND ON a playoff team with contending aspirations.

Tucker was out of the league as early as two years ago, at 29 years old has never developed a reliable 3pt shot, he leaves his heart on the court but results as defensive stopper are variable, and all of this while playing on a lottery team. So he is not Tony Allen, and I believe he won't be, I think we are looking right now at a PJ at his best, or close to it. To beat Marcus Morris for the starting spot is not something to warrant 4mill or more. Contracts' lenght and amount are getting smaller, and every new contract must consider it. 3 years used to be a short lenght for a decent contract just a few years ago, but now is becoming the standard for non-difference-makers.

Other teams seems to agree with me, as we didn't exactly saw a hot market for him at the tradeline. The summer is a hole new game, as teams could be tempted to pull a Knicks-go-for-Amare and overpay in order to avoid striking out in free agency.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote: And to be fair, we are "only" one million apart in our valoration for players on Tucker's rank.

1M in the realm of the contracts we are talking about means 25%. I'd say that's a relevant amount.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:Talk about Tony Allen

Ok, but I am not saying that Tucker is better or equal to Allen. Which is why I've said that if Tucker gets a contract around what Allen makes ($5M per) he should be let go.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:...So he is not Tony Allen

I know. And I also believe PJ won't get better than he is. The thing is that NBA teams often make moves looking at the now, not what will happen in four years. We can debate how harmful that can be to a franchise, but the Grizzlies, since you bring up Allen and since they are pointed as a possible destination for Tucker, are in a win now mode that typically fall into that 'right now' mindset.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:To beat Marcus Morris for the starting spot is not something to warrant 4mill or more.

That's a weird argument, and not exactly something you can hold against Tucker. Who by the way is not being considered as a started for these matters, at least by me. Otherwise we wouldn't be talking about a contract in the 3-5M range.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:Contracts' lenght and amount are getting smaller

Sure, but you are talking about a RFA. If you want to nab one of those you typically have to overpay one way or another. You can do it in yearly salary, number of years or both. If I were a team interested in actually getting this player, I'd make sure the exact figure and number of years make the Suns uncomfortable. By the way, a role player can make a tremendous difference. Look no further than the Grizzlies, who acquired Courtney Lee and was a key part to making the playoffs.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:Other teams seems to agree with me, as we didn't exactly saw a hot market for him at the tradeline.

wat

Again, every contract counts against a cap, and with the new tax rules, every million has to be carefully allocated. You can't left one million here and there and not regret it, unless you have deep pockets.

Going from 3 to 4 millions it's a 33% raise, but using your logic, you also make it looks like going almost full Tony Allen on Tucker's contract is not big deal. You said going over 5 is your breaking point, mine is going over 4, as I consider Tucker several notches below the Allen standard.

We are not in a Win-now situation, so there is no need to overpay to keep role players, even overpaying for Bledsoe should be carefully consider, let alone overpay for your aging 3&D guy. I would go as far as gambling on keeping Marcus and look for him on taking another step forward (not a crazy idea considering his age) that giving 4-5 mill a year to Tucker. And you have to consider that I put the Morrii on every trade scenario I make.

Would be interesting if he would consider going 4.5, 3.5, 3 and 3 with a partial for 1 on year 4. That's 11 mill over 3 years, adjusting to a decreasing rate, to keep him as a good value. If he gets cut, still get 12 over 3 years, but could get as much as 14 if the team likes his level at the time. Or 4 flat over 3 years, with a team option for the third year, let's share the risk.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:...using your logic, you also make it looks like going almost full Tony Allen on Tucker's contract is not big deal.

I don't know how you can come to this conclusion, when I've implied several times that to me there is an ideal range to resign him, then a zone where both parties can afford to give in and then a point where you let go the player. A point that meets what Allen makes! Does this sound like someone who doesn't care about the cap?

I consider Tucker several notches below the Allen standard.

It is fine as long as we you talk just about defense. Very few can match Allen, and I am not arguing that Tucker is a better defender although there must be a reason as to why the Grizzlies, who already have Allen, are considering PJ. The guy not only defends, but also rebounds and makes corner threes, and you have to pay for it. If he was a completely unidimensional player 'several notches' below the elite at that specific thing we wouldn't be having this discussion.

We are not in a Win-now situation

That's debatable at best. Wether we like it or not this team has won 48 games and its best player is 28 years old. Three key contributors are also that age or older and until the picks are actually made there are only two guys under 24 on the roster, who by the way are not given the kind of default minutes that non winning teams typically award to youngsters. There are rumors right and left involving the pursue of consolidated stars. The concept of 'too many rookies' is floating around. Maybe many don't like it, or would have wanted a different road, and maybe we are here sooner than expected, probably even by accident, and certainly we are not strangled cap wise, but having assets and the flexibility to pursue any direction doesn't just rule out being in a 'win-now situation'.

there is no need to overpay to keep role players

Nobody is saying 'keep this role player at any cost'. We are just not agreeing on the exact ideal value of this player, that's all.

I would go as far as gambling on keeping Marcus and look for him on taking another step forward (not a crazy idea considering his age) that giving 4-5 mill a year to Tucker.

I don't know what to make out of this. Marcus can stay and we can try to develop him further, that's ok. But what is the gamble? That he becomes a defender close to Tucker? If that's it, the gamble is already lost in my opinion. If he improved on other areas he could take Tucker's starting spot, but that's not exactly an argument against paying PJ say 4.25M per, if for no other reason because I hope we find a better starting 3 than both. Just for the record, in my ideal scenario we have a relevant starter SF (Gordon), Tucker comes off the bench, plays less minutes and doesn't have as many chances to do what he can't on offense while Marcus would be the third SF and plays spot minutes at PF if needed.

Would be interesting if he would consider going 4.5, 3.5, 3 and 3 with a partial for 1 on year 4.

This is a nice approach. Flat 4M per with only two years fully guaranteed looks too team favorable in my opinion. But if he took it, great.

I knew July 1 wasn't the deadline for Frye's option:

Frye has a player option for the 2014-15 of $6.8 million that he must pick up by June 23 - three days before the 2014 NBA Draft - or become an unrestricted free agent this summer.

http://www.brightsideofthesun.com/2014/ ... ision-will

INFORMER wrote:I knew July 1 wasn't the deadline for Frye's option:

Frye has a player option for the 2014-15 of $6.8 million that he must pick up by June 23 - three days before the 2014 NBA Draft - or become an unrestricted free agent this summer.

http://www.brightsideofthesun.com/2014/ ... ision-will

Crossing my fingers that he doesn't.....

I kind of hope he does. I think he can be used in a trade.