Suns News: 2019 Off-Season

[Split T]

I don’t get Lonzo...he’s literally the worst shooter we’ve seen in a long time.

Who cares? Ben Simmons can’t shoot. Jason Kidd couldn’t shoot until he got older. Rondo’s been a horrible shooter and he was a championship PG.

Lonzo’s a great distributor and defender. The two things we need most. He would make the players on our team better, especially Ayton.

Kidd and Rondo player in different era’s...plus they were better than Lonzo at everything else. Simmons doesn’t shoot jumpers, but he still shoots at 55% from the field. Lonzo can’t make any shots...plus Simmons is also better at everything else. Lonzo is Rubio. He can be fine, but I’m not giving up 6 for him, no chance.

I would give up #6 for Rubio. Heck, I wouldn’t be mad if Sarver wanted to just sell #6 (a la 2004-2006), in order to have more cap space. Chances are we aren’t going to get a good player at #6 in this draft, and we don’t need any more rookies.

That’s terrible...the 6th pick in the draft isn’t as good as a typical 6th pick, but it’s not worthless. There are good players there.

[Flagrant Fowl]

I don’t get Lonzo...he’s literally the worst shooter we’ve seen in a long time.

Who cares? Ben Simmons can’t shoot. Jason Kidd couldn’t shoot until he got older. Rondo’s been a horrible shooter and he was a championship PG.

Lonzo’s a great distributor and defender. The two things we need most. He would make the players on our team better, especially Ayton.

Kidd and Rondo player in different era’s...plus they were better than Lonzo at everything else. Simmons doesn’t shoot jumpers, but he still shoots at 55% from the field. Lonzo can’t make any shots...plus Simmons is also better at everything else. Lonzo is Rubio. He can be fine, but I’m not giving up 6 for him, no chance.

I would give up #6 for Rubio. Heck, I wouldn’t be mad if Sarver wanted to just sell #6 (a la 2004-2006), in order to have more cap space. Chances are we aren’t going to get a good player at #6 in this draft, and we don’t need any more rookies.

That’s terrible...the 6th pick in the draft isn’t as good as a typical 6th pick, but it’s not worthless. There are good players there.

Yeah, that idea is straight out of the SDC textbook of bad ideas.

[In2ition]

Rubio is an unrestricted FA. You can't trade the 6th pick for him, I believe. Just sign him outright if you want him.

[JeremyG]

I know Rubio is a free agent, I was just speaking hypothetically.

There clearly is some value to the #6 pick, so I wouldn’t sell it, but I would definitely trade it for the best value I could get for it. The thought of adding another mediocre rookie makes me sick to my stomach.

That is what it sounded like James Jones was saying a few months ago, too. I wonder if Bower (or Monty?) has convinced him otherwise.

[In2ition]

I know Rubio is a free agent, I was just speaking hypothetically.

There clearly is some value to the #6 pick, so I wouldn’t sell it, but I would definitely trade it for the best value I could get for it. The thought of adding another mediocre rookie makes me sick to my stomach.

That is what it sounded like James Jones was saying a few months ago, too. I wonder if Bower (or Monty?) has convinced him otherwise.

Ok, I can see that. I agree

[Split T]

I’d much rather have Coby White than Rubio, and there’s like 6 guys who will be available in this draft I’d take over White.

[INFORMER]

I would give up #6 for Rubio. Heck, I wouldn’t be mad if Sarver wanted to just sell #6 (a la 2004-2006), in order to have more cap space. Chances are we aren’t going to get a good player at #6 in this draft, and we don’t need any more rookies.

The mistakes of the past have beaten the fanbase senseless.

[JeremyG]

Would you offer Durant a max contract if he opted out and nobody else did?

New question: Would you offer Klay Thompson a max contract if nobody else does?

[Hermen]

I would give up #6 for Rubio. Heck, I wouldn’t be mad if Sarver wanted to just sell #6 (a la 2004-2006), in order to have more cap space. Chances are we aren’t going to get a good player at #6 in this draft, and we don’t need any more rookies.

The mistakes of the past have beaten the fanbase senseless.

To be fair, the team doesn't have a scouting department (or has that changed lately?) so it's not likely they draft well. On the other hand, picking at random might produce better results than the last couple of drafts.

[Indy]

I would give up #6 for Rubio. Heck, I wouldn’t be mad if Sarver wanted to just sell #6 (a la 2004-2006), in order to have more cap space. Chances are we aren’t going to get a good player at #6 in this draft, and we don’t need any more rookies.

The mistakes of the past have beaten the fanbase senseless.

I know I harp on this way too often, but drafting a player in the lottery turns into a slightly higher than 50% chance of being a good NBA player. You don't throw rolls of the dice away in a 50/50 game. It is just stupid. Take your chances knowing that about half of the guys you need to move on from quickly, the other half will be split between decent players and good players, and build your development staff so you can turn those good players into really good players. Ugh.

[O_Gardino]

Sure, but he’d just resign. LA is where he wants to be

So they don't need to trade for him. All this does it get him there 1 year to 6 months sooner. So it is a matter of how much do you have to give the NOP to rent him for those 6-12 months.

I've never understood this impatience by big-market teams to trade for a guy who's going to be a free agent anyway and wants to come there. The Knicks famously traded for Melo with Denver half a season before he would have been an FA anyway, and they gave up all their youth and assets to get him and lowered the ceiling of the team. Why can't LA just wait for the guy to come as a free agent, and then they'll have Davis plus a trove of young assets?

LA waited for Paul George and look how that turned out.

[specialsauce]

I would give up #6 for Rubio. Heck, I wouldn’t be mad if Sarver wanted to just sell #6 (a la 2004-2006), in order to have more cap space. Chances are we aren’t going to get a good player at #6 in this draft, and we don’t need any more rookies.

The mistakes of the past have beaten the fanbase senseless.

I know I harp on this way too often, but drafting a player in the lottery turns into a slightly higher than 50% chance of being a good NBA player. You don't throw rolls of the dice away in a 50/50 game. It is just stupid. Take your chances knowing that about half of the guys you need to move on from quickly, the other half will be split between decent players and good players, and build your development staff so you can turn those good players into really good players. Ugh.

Amare
Zarko
Lopez
Clark
Len
Keef
Marshall
Booker
Warren
Ennis
Bender
Chriss
Jackson
Ayton
Bridges


Those are all of our lottery (or near in Ennis and Zarko) since 2000.

Of players that have demonstrated actual NBA talent that would get consistent PT for all teams, you’re looking at:

Amare
Rolo
Len
Keef
Booker
Warren
Bridges

Not counting Ayton. The #1 pick should be guaranteed.

I would argue Len did not meet the quality of play that his draft position could have met should it have been traded for an established player that year.

Booker and Amare outperformed their draft positions. The rest I think fall in line with where they were drafted.

1 guaranteed
2 surprises
4 as expected
1 disappointment
7 busts


Can get much better odds in FA acquiring known talent.

[ShelC]

Zarko...what could've been

[specialsauce]

Zarko...what could've been

If he was really that mentally fragile that one injury derailed his confidence and career, then he never was.

[The Bobster]

Can get much better odds in FA acquiring known talent.

But it's usually much more expensive.

[Indy]

Can get much better odds in FA acquiring known talent.

But it's usually much more expensive.

And they have to choose to play here. You can't discount that. And if you are trading for them, they have to be someone that the other team wants to get rid of, at least for what you are willing to give them. Draft picks are really the only time where you are in control of your own destiny, with a fixed cost.

For those that keep saying we should trade our #6 for a proven, good, NBA caliber PG or PF, why is the other team giving up this person for a complete unknown in #6? And who is on the market for #6? We keep talking about getting Spencer or Ball, but no report from those teams seem to indicate they would prefer #6 to those guys.

[carey]

Yep, gone are the days of stars like Ray Allen being traded for the 5th pick in the draft. Teams hang on to their stars or the cost is ridiculous.

[Indy]

Yep, gone are the days of stars like Ray Allen being traded for the 5th pick in the draft. Teams hang on to their stars or the cost is ridiculous.

Realistically, how far down the list do you have to go for NBA players before you get to one that is available for the 6th pick in this draft (unless they are on an awful contract nobody wants)? 75th? 100th? More?

[specialsauce]

Can get much better odds in FA acquiring known talent.

But it's usually much more expensive.

And they have to choose to play here. You can't discount that. And if you are trading for them, they have to be someone that the other team wants to get rid of, at least for what you are willing to give them. Draft picks are really the only time where you are in control of your own destiny, with a fixed cost.

For those that keep saying we should trade our #6 for a proven, good, NBA caliber PG or PF, why is the other team giving up this person for a complete unknown in #6? And who is on the market for #6? We keep talking about getting Spencer or Ball, but no report from those teams seem to indicate they would prefer #6 to those guys.

My mindset is that I'm only keeping that pick and drafting at that position if I think I can grab a player with star potential. If I'm looking at drafting a player that caps out as a role player, I'd prefer to trade that pick for a guaranteed role player. The risk is not worth the benefit in that case.

I'm down to gamble on a player who could be a star, not a role player. If I knew Alex Len would cap out at what he was, I'd trade that pick every time. That's what I'm seeing at #6 here. I'd prefer to trade it to acquire a role player rather than hope whoever we draft turns out to be a reliable role player after several years.


For example, I'd be open to exploring a trade with Cleveland

Suns get: Larry Nance JR on his upcoming 4 year/ 44M extension, JR Smith (waive him, therefore only being accountable for 3.8M)
Cavs get: #6 pick, Josh Jackson, Tyler Johnson

LNJ: 12.7M
JR: 15.6M (only 3.8 guaranteed)

JJ: 7M
Meth: 19.2M

So we get our complementary PF to Ayton at LNJ for the cost of the sixth pick. We also then save nearly $12M in the deal once we waive JR.
Ship TJ Warren somewhere for cap savings. That frees up another $11M.

I'd then go after Malcom Brogdon hard.

Suns end up flipping TJ Warren, Josh Jackson, #6 and Tyler Johnson for Malcolm Brogdon and Larry Nance JR.

Brogdon/Okobo/Melton
Booker
Oubre/Bridges
Nance Jr/Bender on the cheap
Ayton

[In2ition]

I was listening to a Knicks podcast the other day and they talked about possibly striking out on a 2nd star, and they would sign KD and then trade cap space to Phoenix for Tyler Johnson's contract and a possible future 1st and/or 2 2nds. They would do this, just to hold the cap space available for next year to get that 2nd star and essentially get another lottery pick, KD and another star to start out the '20-'21 season.