Amare - Likely Destinations

[HooverDam]

I don't think OKC wants to rent amare for a year and a half. What are the chances he even considers resigning with them?

Are you saying he wouldn't want to stay there just because of the city and it not seeming very appealing? Because as far as the team goes, Westbrook, Durant and Amare would be a damned nice trio. Plus they'd still have a lottery pick of their own in the 2009 draft to grab another nice player. Amare might be able to be on the idea of being the 'co-man' with Durant and that may be enough for him.

 

[SirStefan32]

Amare and Dragic for the 4 Ive discussed from OKC also works, but would OKC do that? Do they really want another PG, I doubt it. Furthermore, does Kerr and Co really want to admit so early that Dragic was a mistake?

It doesn't matter. We are not talking about Dragic. We are talking about Hill and how he is not going anywhere unless he requests a trade to a contender.
Hill is the best defensive player Suns have and is one of the best overall players on the team. He is not going to be included in a trade as a filler.

 

[AceP]

Some of you guys are completely missing the points and ignoring the business part. Pro fans should be able to read and understand the following.

#1. One of the goal is to REDUCE PAYROLL. We are above tax threshold, every dollor off, means 1 dollr profit. I hope Sarver accept a par deal if the package is good. But don't expect more than that!

#2. Barbosa is vulnerable. Yes, he is playing well and we really like him. But it also means he is a very good trade asset, that other teams might like to take him. His contract size and lenght also makes him very useful in payroll cutting attempt.


Amare + Barbosa = 21M
Watson + Wilcox + Green = 16M

It already works financially without Joe Smith, saving us about 10M. Meanwhile OKC is under tax threshold, so they don't mind at all. If you remember the KT deal, you would know we would even send OKC cash to make it work, just like split the profit with business partner.

I am telling you, if such a deal is on table, it is very attractive for Sarver and Kerr.

 

[HooverDam]

^^Tossing in a good player like LB in that deal makes zero sense for the Suns. They can get the same deal from OKC w/ out losing LB.

It doesn't matter. We are not talking about Dragic. We are talking about Hill and how he is not going anywhere unless he requests a trade to a contender.
Hill is the best defensive player Suns have and is one of the best overall players on the team. He is not going to be included in a trade as a filler.

Good freaking gravy, this is like talking to a wall. Let me put it simply for you:

If a nice trade comes along for the Suns, that involves moving Amare and getting back everything you want, but also involves Hill, youre going to turn it down?

If you answered 'yes' to this question, the state Asylum is on 24th st and Van Buren, please go check yourself in.

Furthermore, yes, we are talking about Dragic. Because if you don't use Hill as filler, you've got to use someone and Dragic makes sense salary wise.

 

[AceP]

^^Tossing in a good player like LB in that deal makes zero sense for the Suns. They can get the same deal from OKC w/ out losing LB.

Recall KT deal and Camby deal, please.

 

[HooverDam]

Recall KT deal and Camby deal, please.

Because Kerr (and others) have made deals in the past we should be advocating them making future bad deals? Also LB+Amare for Wilcox+Watson+Green does not work financially so Im really confused by what youre trying to say.

 

[mojorizen7]

I could end up kicking myself later for saying this but i really hope the SUNS can hang on to Barbosa thru all the changes that lie ahead.

 

[asudevil83]

^^Tossing in a good player like LB in that deal makes zero sense for the Suns. They can get the same deal from OKC w/ out losing LB.



Good freaking gravy, this is like talking to a wall. Let me put it simply for you:

If a nice trade comes along for the Suns, that involves moving Amare and getting back everything you want, but also involves Hill, youre going to turn it down?

If you answered 'yes' to this question, the state Asylum is on 24th st and Van Buren, please go check yourself in.

Furthermore, yes, we are talking about Dragic. Because if you don't use Hill as filler, you've got to use someone and Dragic makes sense salary wise.

i'm pretty darn sure that i've heard over and over that the last team Hill plays for is the suns. meaning that if he's included in a trade, he'll just retire. he doesnt need the money, and would rather not play at all than have to move.

SO, do the suns include him in a trade? probably not. any other team is risking him not reporting, while the suns are just plain risking losing him and at the same time nixing a trade.

 

[HooverDam]

i'm pretty darn sure that i've heard over and over that the last team Hill plays for is the suns. meaning that if he's included in a trade, he'll just retire. he doesnt need the money, and would rather not play at all than have to move.

SO, do the suns include him in a trade? probably not. any other team is risking him not reporting, while the suns are just plain risking losing him and at the same time nixing a trade.

I think you're misunderstanding what Im getting at. Lets look at Ok City for example, would they rather have a Dragic and his 3 year deal, or just Hills expiring deal? I honestly don't know the answer but theres a chance they wouldnt' care if Hills going to retire. He would only be a part of the deal to make it work under the CBA. Like has been discussed he could be cut by OKC and then resigned by the Suns or just retire, but OKC gets Amare, which is what they want, Hill is irrelevant.

But they want like Dragic as a backup PG to Westbrook, its hard to say. Hill saying he'll retire doesn't mean he's untradable.

EDIT: VVV Well you didnt say anything about Sene. Im not a mind reader, youve got to post what you mean. Either way, its still an awful idea on your part, Im not sure why you want to get rid of LB for no reason.

 

[AceP]

Because Kerr (and others) have made deals in the past we should be advocating them making future bad deals? Also LB+Amare for Wilcox+Watson+Green does not work financially so Im really confused by what youre trying to say.

It works financially! All they need to do is add a minimal filler such as Sene or whoever in their roster. http://www.realgm.com/src_checktrade.php?tradeid=4982871

I don't foresee them doing anything, I'm just telling the logic behind a reasonable guess.

 

[slinslin]

You don't trade players who sign for the veteran minimum with you unless they wish to be traded.

 

[elindholm]

I think you're misunderstanding what Im getting at. Lets look at Ok City for example, would they rather have a Dragic and his 3 year deal, or just Hills expiring deal? I honestly don't know the answer but theres a chance they wouldnt' care if Hills going to retire.

You're right. And they also wouldn't care if the Suns gave them Barnes instead. If it is a given that Hill won't play for another team, there is no scenario in which a team would insist on Hill instead of Barnes. None.

 

[HooverDam]

None.

Except that for certain deals Hills salary number would work and Barnes wouldn't.

 

[elindholm]

Except that for certain deals Hills salary number would work and Barnes wouldn't.

I knew you would say that. I said scenario in which the other team would insist on Hill over Barnes (which I thought was your current angle), not one in which it was mandated by salary-matching (which I thought was your old one). Even if you could construct a salary-matching case, it would have the Suns taking on more than $4 million in additional player payroll for this season, which we all know is not going to happen.

Give it up. There's simply no point in arguing that Hill might be included in a Stoudemire trade, unless he changes his mind and specifically asks management to be moved out.

 

[HooverDam]

I knew you would say that. I said scenario in which the other team would insist on Hill over Barnes (which I thought was your current angle), not one in which it was mandated by salary-matching (which I thought was your old one).

I like your implication that Ive somehow 'changed angles' or my argument. For what feels like the 1,000th time, I doubt a lot of teams are jonesing for Hill as they probably wouldnt expect to get him, but its a salary issue.

Even if you could construct a salary-matching case,

I like how you try to insinuate thats its impossible or even difficult. Ive already presented said case numerous times but people can't seem to get it through their heads.

it would have the Suns taking on more than $4 million in additional player payroll for this season, which we all know is not going to happen.

We don't know that at all actually. The Suns may be more than willing to slightly increase the payroll this year for future cap relief. Teams take on bad deals all the time because they know in the long run they'll come out ahead.

Give it up. There's simply no point in arguing that Hill might be included in a Stoudemire trade, unless he changes his mind and specifically asks management to be moved out.

Hilarious that you're telling me to 'give it up' when Im just pointing out that in some deals Hills salary may need to be shipped. Thats so far from a ludicrous idea that I don't know why we're even having this conversation. Unless you haven't been paying attention to the NBA in the last decade you'd know deals like this happen. Furthermore, so do deals where a player is shipped for salary purposes, then cut, and returns back to his original team.

 

[elindholm]

I like how you try to insinuate thats its impossible or even difficult. Ive already presented said case numerous times but people can't seem to get it through their heads.

Yes, I've seen it. I find it implausible for variety of reasons, and even there, the Suns could do Barnes and Tucker instead of Hill.

We don't know that at all actually. The Suns may be more than willing to slightly increase the payroll this year for future cap relief.

Since they are in luxury tax territory, a $4+ million payroll increase is more like $7 million (not $8-9 million since some of the actual player salaries have already been paid). Nothing that this ownership group has ever done suggests that they would agree to take on that kind of extra expense this year. Their fallback plan will be to pull a Camby with Stoudemire this summer, if they are that desperate to shed payroll.

Hills salary may need to be shipped. Thats so far from a ludicrous idea that I don't know why we're even having this conversation.

Okay, we've boiled it down to differing opinions on what consistutes "ludicrous." I guess we'll have to leave it at that.

Unless you haven't been paying attention to the NBA in the last decade you'd know deals like this happen. Furthermore, so do deals where a player is shipped for salary purposes, then cut, and returns back to his original team.

Actually, I don't remember it ever happening with a player making less than $2 million and having already publicly declared he won't play anywhere else, but I'm open to being corrected. Remember, the cut-and-return play works only if the league can be convinced that the player, at some point, had some intention of reporting to the intermediate team. Otherwise they'd just void it.

 

[HooverDam]

Yes, I've seen it. I find it implausible for variety of reasons, and even there, the Suns could do Barnes and Tucker instead of Hill.

Im not sure they'd want Tucker, but he's probably worth taking on for an extra year since he's so cheap. But then again I've already mentioned that.
If the Thunder was willing to take Barnes and Tucker I'd be all for it though.I dont really see why the deal seems implausible, its an infinitely more sensible deal than anything that Chad Ford for instance has proposed.

Since they are in luxury tax territory, a $4+ million payroll increase is more like $7 million (not $8-9 million since some of the actual player salaries have already been paid). Nothing that this ownership group has ever done suggests that they would agree to take on that kind of extra expense this year. Their fallback plan will be to pull a Camby with Stoudemire this summer, if they are that desperate to shed payroll.

That assumes the Suns make no other deals. If they move Amare its delusional to think they're going to make any deal that will make them some sort of western power. Moving Amare means moving Shaq is likely as well which would likely bring the payroll down.

Actually, I don't remember it ever happening with a player making less than $2 million and having already publicly declared he won't play anywhere else, but I'm open to being corrected. Remember, the cut-and-return play works only if the league can be convinced that the player, at some point, had some intention of reporting to the intermediate team. Otherwise they'd just void it.

I didn't realize analogous situations had to be identical to be considered valid. Determining someone's heart or intentions is an extremely difficult thing to do and the league is unlikely to try to void a deal based on their beliefs or assumptions of what someone intends to do.

 

[elindholm]

its an infinitely more sensible deal than anything that Chad Ford for instance has proposed.

I wouldn't go so far as "infinitely," but I agree that Ford's scenarios are pretty laughable.

Moving Amare means moving Shaq is likely as well which would likely bring the payroll down.

I think it's very unlikely that they'll find a taker for O'Neal unless they're willing to accept long-term contracts coming back, which we seem to agree that they won't.

I didn't realize analogous situations had to be identical to be considered valid.

Well, they have to be similar in the critical ways. In all of the cases you are thinking of, the player had a distinctive salary size that was needed to make the numbers work. The scenarios in which Hill's exact salary number is needed have to be so artfully constructed that I don't consider them worthy of discussion. But you do, and that's okay.

 

[PhxGametime]

Did anybody like the two Trade Proposals from Chad Ford concerning Shaq??


$20-21 Million off the cap and without having to give up Picks to the Mavs or lakers?? Shaq was becomming my favorite Sun but I could live with those Trades...


Still concerned about the Stoudemire deals... I like the Thunder deal! Heat deal is decent too! The Knicks deal would be scary if they lost Lee but I do like Lee and Robinson; the Bulls I'd prefer Noah over Sefolosha and minus Pick - it's just not as sexy; I do like Yi from the Nets and that is the one deal with a 1st Rounder but I'd probably prefer Boone over Anderson; Cavs and Pistons deals do nothing for ME without a Pick and even then - I'd expect $3 Million cash (Sarver and the Suns might want to ask to get $3 Million in deal themselves) lol; and that Grizzlies deal is weak!

 

[HooverDam]

Did anybody like the two Trade Proposals from Chad Ford concerning Shaq??

The Dallas trade is insanely stupid and I dont think either team would do it. The LA deal makes very little sense for LA whos already the class of the West, it seems like an unnecessary dice roll. If the Suns did the deal w/ LA they'd likely not resign any of the 3 players so its a pure cash dump, with that in mind I'd hope they'd at least get a 2nd round pick back from LA, they'd need something to help them in the future.

Shaq for Starbury works straight up. If Im Phx I'd explore that, with a draft pick of some kind thrown in from NY. D'Antoni likes Shaq, and adding to that team for basically nothing probably secures their spot in the playoffs and gets Shaq out of the West for whatever thats worth. Maybe the Suns could also try to get Wilson Chandler back in the deal, he's a nice young player, the Knicks would probably be more willing to that than give up a pick.

I like the Thunder deal! Heat deal is decent too! !

The Heat deal is my 2nd favorite that Ive heard, though I do have some concerns. Marion would probably hate to come back to Phx and while Im not too worried about him being a cancer this year, Id like the Suns to find a way to sign him to a reasonable deal that would take him to the end of his career since I think he can still be a contributor (maybe something like what Diaws making).

Also, you're trading a guy whos already a star PF for a guy who might become one. We all think Beasley will be good, but its still a bit of an uknown With Jeff Green at least you've got more tape on the guy in the NBA. Finally any picks coming from Miami may not be all that great (i.e. non lottery) since Amare-Wade is a nice duo.

 

[AceP]

The Dallas trade is insanely stupid and I dont think either team would do it. The LA deal makes very little sense for LA whos already the class of the West, it seems like an unnecessary dice roll. If the Suns did the deal w/ LA they'd likely not resign any of the 3 players so its a pure cash dump, with that in mind I'd hope they'd at least get a 2nd round pick back from LA, they'd need something to help them in the future.

Shaq for Starbury works straight up. If Im Phx I'd explore that, with a draft pick of some kind thrown in from NY. D'Antoni likes Shaq, and adding to that team for basically nothing probably secures their spot in the playoffs and gets Shaq out of the West for whatever thats worth. Maybe the Suns could also try to get Wilson Chandler back in the deal, he's a nice young player, the Knicks would probably be more willing to that than give up a pick.



The Heat deal is my 2nd favorite that Ive heard, though I do have some concerns. Marion would probably hate to come back to Phx and while Im not too worried about him being a cancer this year, Id like the Suns to find a way to sign him to a reasonable deal that would take him to the end of his career since I think he can still be a contributor (maybe something like what Diaws making).

Also, you're trading a guy whos already a star PF for a guy who might become one. We all think Beasley will be good, but its still a bit of an uknown With Jeff Green at least you've got more tape on the guy in the NBA. Finally any picks coming from Miami may not be all that great (i.e. non lottery) since Amare-Wade is a nice duo.

You guys just don't get it, check the salary of the players first. WE WILL NOT TAKE MORE SALARY BACK IN ANY DEAL.

Marion + Beasley is already more than 21M. It has to be Amare + Barbosa.

Amare + fillers works under rule, but the 4-5M increase in payroll will cause 4-5M extra tax. There is no way Sarver would allow that to happen.

 

[CharlieTheBull]

A/ Richard Jefferson + Charlie Bell + Charlie Villanueva / Amare

B/ Ron Artest + Shane Battier + Carl Landry / Amare + Barnes

C/ Rashaun McCants + Mike Miller + Ryan Gomes + Craig Smith / Amare + Lopez + Tucker

D/ Lamar Odom + Chris Mihm + Sasha Vujacic / Shaq

 

[AceP]

A/ Richard Jefferson + Charlie Bell + Charlie Villanueva / Amare

B/ Ron Artest + Shane Battier + Carl Landry / Amare + Barnes

C/ Rashaun McCants + Mike Miller + Ryan Gomes + Craig Smith / Amare + Lopez + Tucker

D/ Lamar Odom + Chris Mihm + Sasha Vujacic / Shaq

Personally, I love this one for the Suns. Vujacic is a great shooter to play alongside Nash. Odom is the PF for next few years since we are losing Amare, we can re-sign him as we have huge cap space. But I doubt if the Lakers would do so.

 

[lou_skywalker]

I would love to have Beasley and Marion back. But should Marion be playing PF or SF?
coz if he plays PF then Beas would be benching and if he plays SF then both HIll and Barnes will get less minutes.

 

[Covert Rain]

I would love to have Beasley and Marion back. But should Marion be playing PF or SF?
coz if he plays PF then Beas would be benching and if he plays SF then both HIll and Barnes will get less minutes.

I defintely would not want to see Marion back. Besides if you look at his numbers, Hill is playing just as well defensively and is a better offensive player. There would be no reason to play Marion over Hill at SF. Then if you look at Marion's numbers at PF, they are really bad. He allows too many PPG at the Power Forward position.

Marion would be the one getting less minutes in this scenario. It would be a very good rotation at small forward though.