Coro: Suns lock down frye 5/30m

[hafey]

I am not sure if that is the best option, but you do bring up an interesting point. With JRich and Hill coming off the books next season, the Suns will have about $18M to spend that they wouldn't have had they trade Amare for longer term contracts or used a TPE. But this of course hinges on who's available and the Suns ability to sign them.

Not to mention the possibility of Nash retiring during the lockout, which I could see happening. The Suns are well positioned, with the Fyre/Warrick contracts and all, for the post-lockout, new CBA environment. Whether that's a good thing with Bob Sarver, GM is probably another debate.

 

[cly2tw]

Right, that's the other concern. Of course if we can't get top tier free agents to sign here, then we might as well forget trying to win a title in the future.

That's what Sarver's approaches have been setting up for the Suns franchise to become, Phoenix Clippers. And he seems to be fine with that as long as he makes money with gullible fans who love the Suns based on tradition.

 

[joshstmarie]

I remember back a few short months ago at the allstar break when people swore up and down they would rather let amare walk than get hickson/Z package from cleavland. LOL @ You. And thats a long list of people.

 

[Mainstreet]

I am not sure if that is the best option, but you do bring up an interesting point. With JRich and Hill coming off the books next season, the Suns will have about $18M to spend that they wouldn't have had they trade Amare for longer term contracts or used a TPE. But this of course hinges on who's available and the Suns ability to sign them.

Also LB has a player option after next season. If he has a good season, he could be in demand.

 

[SunsTzu]

I remember back a few short months ago at the allstar break when people swore up and down they would rather let amare walk than get hickson/Z package from cleavland. LOL @ You. And thats a long list of people.

Even knowing what we know now I still wouldn't have done that trade. The 2nd half run the Suns went on with a deep playoff run is worth more to me than Hickson.

This isn't about being upset with Amare walking, it's about being upset with trying to replace Amare by overpaying Frye and adding Warrick. Only reason to try and retain a player like Frye at the amount he got is if you are in contention, which without Amare the Suns are not.

 

[Mainstreet]

Even knowing what we know now I still wouldn't have done that trade. The 2nd half run the Suns went on with a deep playoff run is worth more to me than Hickson.

This isn't about being upset with Amare walking, it's about being upset with trying to replace Amare by overpaying Frye and adding Warrick. Only reason to try and retain a player like Frye at the amount he got is if you are in contention, which without Amare the Suns are not.

I certainly don't think the Suns were trying to replace Amare by signing Frye. He was already on the Suns roster. They were just trying to keep him but the off season market was crazy. Now Warrick was added to help replace the vacuum left by Amare at PF. I don't think anyone expects him to play anywhere near the level of Amare. I'm hoping Lawal is a quick learn. Clark also needs to produce on the frontline.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

supposedly what the rockets were offering was Shane Battier, Ariza, and a resigned Scola.

According to who? Granted Gambo isn't the most reliable source, but I've always heard a combo of Scola, Battier and either Buddinger/pick. This was reported prior to the trade deadline, and would make a lot more sense.

Ariza had what... one good year with the Lakers? He is a good defender, but he shot under 40% from the field last season and he is signed for the next four years (maybe five years I couldn't see on the hoops hype salary page) at $7 million per season.

Here's an interesting question for you; would you rather have Channing Frye at 6 per, or Ariza at 7 per? I think that's a pretty easy question, and every GM would take Ariza. You saw how Channing improved in the Suns system, I have no doubt that Ariza would do the same.

Battier? We don't need him, and he also shot under 40% last year. At least he is a better three point shooter but still would be below average on this Phoenix Suns team.

Battier would be a throw in to make salaries work. He has a one year deal, so it would be a pure money addition. In addition, he plays our deepest position on the team, and I have no idea how he would be below average on the Suns. He can hit open 3's. Anything he could add would be a bonus.

Then we get the chance to overpay Scola, so he would agree to this crappy sign and trade.

I would much rather "overpay" Scola at about 10 per than pay Frye and Warrick the same combined salary. Scola is a legitimate starting PF, and would be a nice fit for what we are doing.

Again, I'd rather have a quarter than two dimes, especially with a gaping hole at starting PF. Frye and Warrick are both nice players off the bench, but bottom line, neither are starters on a quality team.

Of course before any of this can happen Amare Stoudemire would have to agree to sign in Houston, and the rockets would have to leave their skepticism about his knees at the door.

Of course, but since it's obvious that Amare's major concern is the longest and biggest contract, a sign and trade is the best way to facilitate it.

It's easy for us to sit and say, "well they should have made a sign and trade deal." It's entirely more difficult to really make one of these deals happen and get something good in return, especially with so much free agent money out there to be had.

Obviously it's easier said than done, but these aren't fantasy trade scenarios; these are legitimate scenarios that were brought up before the trade deadline, and supposedly had legs as of late. A trade that involved Scola, Battier and a combination of picks/young talent would be an excellent way to not only remain competitive now, but also to bridge the gap for the future.

Unfortunately we have no GM, and nobody to handle the high level negotiations that are critical to successful teams in a crucial offseason. Instead we have an owner who is suddenly an NBA expert, making contract proposals instead of basketball people. (Which is a proven NBA failure) Kind of a scary proposition for a franchise in transition, no?

 

[sunsfan88]

Warrick and Frye replaces Amare....WOW!!

SARVER SELL THE DAMN TEAM!!!!!!!

 

[mojorizen7]

Well, if Nash and Hill are not pleased, most fans will get what they have been clamoring for... rebuild. I respect them both enough to give them what they want.

A rebuild that was immediately hampered by long term deals for mediocre players. (Especially Channing, who's contract will look even more ridiculous post CBA/lockout)

Either you're rebuilding or contending for a championship. Now we're half assing both, which makes you the Pacers of the world. Disgusting.

Thats a BINGO. I've been saying this for two years. With the events unfolding like they are,i'm even more grateful and impressed with last season's anomalous great run.

Treading above water could be one of the tagline's going forward.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Thats a BINGO. I've been saying this for two years. With the events unfolding like they are,i'm even more grateful and impressed with last season's anomalous great run.

What'ya mean anomalous? I knew all those guys.

Steve

 

[mojorizen7]

What'ya mean anomalous? I knew all those guys.

Steve

anomalous
1 : inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anomalous

 

[AzStevenCal]

anomalous
1 : inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anomalous

Next you'll tell me that malaprop is an actual word.

Steve

 

[Joe Mama]

According to who? Granted Gambo isn't the most reliable source, but I've always heard a combo of Scola, Battier and either Buddinger/pick. This was reported prior to the trade deadline, and would make a lot more sense.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AhiSEqvDO_rMO3vD3UDc5VG8vLYF?slug=ys-freeagentbuzz070110

That other stuff is supposedly, I repeat supposedly, what they were offering around the trade deadline. I haven't seen or heard anybody mention Budinger/pick this summer except for here on this message board.

Here's an interesting question for you; would you rather have Channing Frye at 6 per, or Ariza at 7 per? I think that's a pretty easy question, and every GM would take Ariza. You saw how Channing improved in the Suns system, I have no doubt that Ariza would do the same.

Let's not overrate Ariza. Last season he was a 30.8% jump shooter. The thing he did best last season was shoot three pointers, and he shot 33%. In just about every other play type he was either below average or poor. I would say they are both overpaid, but my guess is that it would depend on the GM's team's needs. Ariza is also a small forward which is the easiest position in the NBA to fill. For the Phoenix Suns, I would take Channing Frye at $6 million per season and not think twice about it.

That said, I didn't want to give Channing Frye a contract averaging $6 million per season. I'm hoping like hell that he will and I do believe he will continue to improve. He's got great size/length. He's just soft right now. Still, the very most I thought they should give him was a deal averaging $5 million, and I had hoped for a team option after the third season. I was hoping we could get him at $4 million, but the second I saw that Drew Gooden $32 million I figured Frye would get something similar. But the point is that I think he's overpaid and I certainly wouldn't want their sons to trade for someone I consider to be just as or even more overpaid than him.

Battier would be a throw in to make salaries work. He has a one year deal, so it would be a pure money addition. In addition, he plays our deepest position on the team, and I have no idea how he would be below average on the Suns. He can hit open 3's. Anything he could add would be a bonus.

I meant that his three point shooting, which was 36% last year, would be below average for the Phoenix Suns. So not only do we not need Ariza, but we also don't be Shane Battier. I know he is a pure money addition, but that's what we don't want. Paying him $7.4 million next season is a bonus?

I would much rather "overpay" Scola at about 10 per than pay Frye and Warrick the same combined salary. Scola is a legitimate starting PF, and would be a nice fit for what we are doing.

Again, I'd rather have a quarter than two dimes, especially with a gaping hole at starting PF. Frye and Warrick are both nice players off the bench, but bottom line, neither are starters on a quality team.

Okay, you are assuming that you can get Scola at about $10 million per season. I would say based on the money that is out there, the dearth of free agent big man, and what we've already seen happen so far with big men who aren't even of his caliber, $10 million is wishful thinking. That's especially true when we are talking about getting him to agree to a sign and trade. Now I know he didn't make the whole lot last year ($3.3 million) and he's only played in the NBA three years. So I apologize in advance if the cap on what he can make in his new contract is around $10 million. If it's allowed under the CBA though I'm sure he will get closer to $12-13 million.

Of course, but since it's obvious that Amare's major concern is the longest and biggest contract, a sign and trade is the best way to facilitate it.

Yeah, but again you are assuming that Houston actually wants to give him a six-year maximum deal. One of the suppose it hangups with a trade deadline deal was that they were worried about his knees also.

Obviously it's easier said than done, but these aren't fantasy trade scenarios; these are legitimate scenarios that were brought up before the trade deadline, and supposedly had legs as of late. A trade that involved Scola, Battier and a combination of picks/young talent would be an excellent way to not only remain competitive now, but also to bridge the gap for the future.

Unfortunately we have no GM, and nobody to handle the high level negotiations that are critical to successful teams in a crucial offseason. Instead we have an owner who is suddenly an NBA expert, making contract proposals instead of basketball people. (Which is a proven NBA failure) Kind of a scary proposition for a franchise in transition, no?

They are legitimate based on rumors from a few months ago combined with recent rumors, except that the only place I've seen where they talked about specific players Houston was offering it was Battier, Ariza, and a re-signed Scola. Like I've said a few times now that package is nothing to get excited about. Even if they threw in a draft pick I would turn that down. Actually, the one guy I would want from their roster is Jordan Hill. I believe if you played him 30+ minutes per game with this team he would average 15/10.

Here's the problem I have with this sign and trade talk, and I'm really not even talking about you as much as other people around here. Everybody on the message board says, "oh, if you are going to let them go you've got to do a sign and trade." It's a miserable failure if you don't. But it's not like these teams are offering great packages in a sign and trade. I have yet to hear of a team willing to give Amare Stoudemire the super maximum deal. Frankly the rumors have been the opposite... that teams are having the same concerns as the Phoenix Suns about fully guaranteeing the last year or two on a five-year contract. There so much money out there right now that there's just not a lot of motivation, and on top of that these things are extremely complicated. The Houston possibility was remote because you had to have two players willing to go to the specific teams and willing to go for the prices that teams were offering. Then you have to agree on all the other players involved. It may have been a real possibility around the trade deadline, but my guess is that the talks with Houston the last week really didn't get too far.

I'm not excited about paying $10 million per season for the Channing Frye/Hakeem Warrick combination. Unlike a lot of people here I really did not want to lose Frye, but for $6 million and that her work his ass off this summer working on his game. I was going not excited about paying somebody like David Lee and contract averaging $13-14 million either

Lastly, there was a mention of Kurt Thomas in an article in the republic today. They think they are going to get him for the league minimum I think they are sorely mistaken, but I would love him back here.

Joe

 

[Yuma]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AhiSEqvDO_rMO3vD3UDc5VG8vLYF?slug=ys-freeagentbuzz070110

That other stuff is supposedly, I repeat supposedly, what they were offering around the trade deadline. I haven't seen or heard anybody mention Budinger/pick this summer except for here on this message board.



Let's not overrate Ariza. Last season he was a 30.8% jump shooter. The thing he did best last season was shoot three pointers, and he shot 33%. In just about every other play type he was either below average or poor. I would say they are both overpaid, but my guess is that it would depend on the GM's team's needs. Ariza is also a small forward which is the easiest position in the NBA to fill. For the Phoenix Suns, I would take Channing Frye at $6 million per season and not think twice about it.

That said, I didn't want to give Channing Frye a contract averaging $6 million per season. I'm hoping like hell that he will and I do believe he will continue to improve. He's got great size/length. He's just soft right now. Still, the very most I thought they should give him was a deal averaging $5 million, and I had hoped for a team option after the third season. I was hoping we could get him at $4 million, but the second I saw that Drew Gooden $32 million I figured Frye would get something similar. But the point is that I think he's overpaid and I certainly wouldn't want their sons to trade for someone I consider to be just as or even more overpaid than him.



I meant that his three point shooting, which was 36% last year, would be below average for the Phoenix Suns. So not only do we not need Ariza, but we also don't be Shane Battier. I know he is a pure money addition, but that's what we don't want. Paying him $7.4 million next season is a bonus?



Okay, you are assuming that you can get Scola at about $10 million per season. I would say based on the money that is out there, the dearth of free agent big man, and what we've already seen happen so far with big men who aren't even of his caliber, $10 million is wishful thinking. That's especially true when we are talking about getting him to agree to a sign and trade. Now I know he didn't make the whole lot last year ($3.3 million) and he's only played in the NBA three years. So I apologize in advance if the cap on what he can make in his new contract is around $10 million. If it's allowed under the CBA though I'm sure he will get closer to $12-13 million.



Yeah, but again you are assuming that Houston actually wants to give him a six-year maximum deal. One of the suppose it hangups with a trade deadline deal was that they were worried about his knees also.



They are legitimate based on rumors from a few months ago combined with recent rumors, except that the only place I've seen where they talked about specific players Houston was offering it was Battier, Ariza, and a re-signed Scola. Like I've said a few times now that package is nothing to get excited about. Even if they threw in a draft pick I would turn that down. Actually, the one guy I would want from their roster is Jordan Hill. I believe if you played him 30+ minutes per game with this team he would average 15/10.

Here's the problem I have with this sign and trade talk, and I'm really not even talking about you as much as other people around here. Everybody on the message board says, "oh, if you are going to let them go you've got to do a sign and trade." It's a miserable failure if you don't. But it's not like these teams are offering great packages in a sign and trade. I have yet to hear of a team willing to give Amare Stoudemire the super maximum deal. Frankly the rumors have been the opposite... that teams are having the same concerns as the Phoenix Suns about fully guaranteeing the last year or two on a five-year contract. There so much money out there right now that there's just not a lot of motivation, and on top of that these things are extremely complicated. The Houston possibility was remote because you had to have two players willing to go to the specific teams and willing to go for the prices that teams were offering. Then you have to agree on all the other players involved. It may have been a real possibility around the trade deadline, but my guess is that the talks with Houston the last week really didn't get too far.

I'm not excited about paying $10 million per season for the Channing Frye/Hakeem Warrick combination. Unlike a lot of people here I really did not want to lose Frye, but for $6 million and that her work his ass off this summer working on his game. I was going not excited about paying somebody like David Lee and contract averaging $13-14 million either

Lastly, there was a mention of Kurt Thomas in an article in the republic today. They think they are going to get him for the league minimum I think they are sorely mistaken, but I would love him back here.

Joe

Joe I agree with you. Maybe you can back me up. Guys are saying we should blow this team up. I keep pointing out, we don't have anything anyone wants to be able to blow the team up. What GM in their right mind will give us anything for JRich, Hill, Barbosa, or even Nash at what we are paying him? To get rid of guys, you have to have someone willing to take them. The only scenario that makes sense to me for getting rid of Nash is IF the Lakers want to get rid of Fisher and can fit Nash on their squad. We would get guys like Farmar in return. I don't see Sarver doing that.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

I keep pointing out, we don't have anything anyone wants to be able to blow the team up. What GM in their right mind will give us anything for JRich, Hill, Barbosa, or even Nash at what we are paying him? To get rid of guys, you have to have someone willing to take them. The only scenario that makes sense to me for getting rid of Nash is IF the Lakers want to get rid of Fisher and can fit Nash on their squad. We would get guys like Farmar in return. I don't see Sarver doing that.

You couldn't be more wrong. JRich is a decent player with an expiring contract. Grant Hill is on a one year deal, provides great leadership, and makes nothing. Nash is a bargain at 10 million per, and there are many teams that could use him. Sure, Barbosa has a bad deal, but you are completely wrong on every other player.

The only good reason not to blow it up is that we have no leadership and no plan to execute a rebuild. The idea of Sarver/? blowing things up and rebuilding is a terrifying possibility.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Joe I agree with you. Maybe you can back me up. Guys are saying we should blow this team up. I keep pointing out, we don't have anything anyone wants to be able to blow the team up. What GM in their right mind will give us anything for JRich, Hill, Barbosa, or even Nash at what we are paying him? To get rid of guys, you have to have someone willing to take them. The only scenario that makes sense to me for getting rid of Nash is IF the Lakers want to get rid of Fisher and can fit Nash on their squad. We would get guys like Farmar in return. I don't see Sarver doing that.

The Lakers wouldn't have any interest IMO. The triangle doesn't need a Nash type PG so all they'd gain is a good shooter that is more than offset by his defensive weaknesses. The more likely options would be Toronto (for fan interest) and NY. We wouldn't get much from either but I think an unprotected 1st at minimum.

As for Richardson, he has trade value if someone out there perceives a need that he can fill. If not, hold him, as we'll be forced to do with Barbosa until the trading deadline and see what's available. Move Hill when the opportunity arises without regard to compensation to a team of his choosing.

IOW, start the ball rolling now but don't hold a fire sale. When the opportunity arises to get future value in return, jump on it but in the interim avoid committing long term dollars to players that are average and below.

Steve

 

[Yuma]

The Lakers wouldn't have any interest IMO. The triangle doesn't need a Nash type PG so all they'd gain is a good shooter that is more than offset by his defensive weaknesses. The more likely options would be Toronto (for fan interest) and NY. We wouldn't get much from either but I think an unprotected 1st at minimum.

As for Richardson, he has trade value if someone out there perceives a need that he can fill. If not, hold him, as we'll be forced to do with Barbosa until the trading deadline and see what's available. Move Hill when the opportunity arises without regard to compensation to a team of his choosing.

IOW, start the ball rolling now but don't hold a fire sale. When the opportunity arises to get future value in return, jump on it but in the interim avoid committing long term dollars to players that are average and below.

Steve

I can agree with trading the guys before the deadline IF we get good deals, otherwise let them play out this year, and I believe Hills and Jrich's contracts come off the books, and then Nash becomes a final year guy. I see value in holding Nash in that Dragic seems to be learning a lot from Steve, and we have to have him play some significant minutes this upcoming season to prove he's ready to take the Nash training wheels off. Until Dragic is ready, I don't see us moving Nash.

 

[Irish]

As my signature says, it takes two sides to get a trade.

IMHO, Toronto is the only team I think would give value for Nash. We'll see, but I'm concerned about wheter we gain much by keeping him since I don't see him staying after his contract is over.

As for Richardson, I'm concerned about him just leaving a year from now. I'm guessing they may hold off until the trade deadline, but I don't think hanging onto a $14 million a year guy is a good iead.

BTW, I'd prefer to hang onto Barbosa. It was clear he was seriously bothered by his writst injury and he was down last season in every categy. His caree stats are quite good: 48.8%, 3 point 39.8%, and 2.6 assists in 25.1 minutes a game. in 206-07 he averaged 18.1 ppg, 2007-08 at 16.6 ppg, and 2008-09 he scored 14.2. He has a history small injuries, but not a knee injury to slow him down.

More than anyone else, Leando could have a huge year this year with Amare gone. Defenders who try to take away his three point shot risk him driving the basket.

 

[Joe Mama]

You couldn't be more wrong. JRich is a decent player with an expiring contract. Grant Hill is on a one year deal, provides great leadership, and makes nothing. Nash is a bargain at 10 million per, and there are many teams that could use him. Sure, Barbosa has a bad deal, but you are completely wrong on every other player.

The only good reason not to blow it up is that we have no leadership and no plan to execute a rebuild. The idea of Sarver/? blowing things up and rebuilding is a terrifying possibility.

I agree with you on the value of the players, but I can also think of a really good reason not to blow it up other than the fact that we have no general manager. That is we should see what this team does first. These guys will most certainly be more valuable once the season is underway. Jason Richardson is going to be quite valuable as he is still productive and has a $14 million expiring contract. Of course he may be most valuable to us as an expiring contract.

If the Suns played poorly makes season Steve Nash would become a very valuable trade commodity as well. Not only is he a great point guard, but he is arguably one of the best two or three shooters in the league today.

If this team contends for the playoffs for barely misses the playoffs they should be more appealing for free agents. The idea is to free up as much space as possible without totally decimating the roster.

Joe

Joe Mama

 

[Griffin]

Back to the original topic, Coro reported that Frye received a 5-year, $34M offer from the Clippers before taking the Suns deal.

* Frye received a full mid-level exception (five years and about $34 million) from the Los Angeles Clippers.

http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/PaulCoro/88249

 

[Chaplin]

Back to the original topic, Coro reported that Frye received a 5-year, $34M offer from the Clippers before taking the Suns deal.

http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/PaulCoro/88249

Wow. This IS Tim Thomas all over again!

 

[carey]

Wow. This IS Tim Thomas all over again!

What really caught my eye from that article Chap....

* If Channing Frye is worth $30 million over five years, what is Jared Dudley worth in a contract extension this fall?

What do you think? Like Frye, Barbosa, and Warrick I think he is a career 6th man. (Wait, are we about to have a starting team made up of 6th men?) The problem is after J-Rich leaves we really won't have any stars other than Steve and he'll be in his final year. What do we do with Duds? 5/25? Let him walk and try and sign Melo? (Who would be a fool not to sign that extension before the CBA hits.) Resign J-Rich?

Where else could 2011 money go? Zach Randolph? David West? Caron Butler? Jamal Crawford? All 3rd banana guys... but at least starters.

 

[Chaplin]

Saving money for next summer is such a dicey proposition because there is a good chance there won't be a season in 2011-2012.

And since there are going to be very few big free agents (if any), we're pretty much screwed.

 

[carey]

So are we planning for free agency in 2012 where we will only have Clark, Lopez, Frye, & Warrick under contract for 13M & whatever Lopez extends for.

Notable 2012 FAs: Jamison, Nene, Melo if he doesn't extend, Pietrus, Carter, our own Nash, Andre Miller, Camby, Duncan, Okur, and Blatche. Not really a crop if in their prime stars.

 

[elindholm]

In my opinion, the free agent to watch in 2011 is Tony Parker. It sounds like he and the Spurs are ready to part ways, he'll still be only 29, and he can probably be a top-five PG for the next five years. He'd overlap with Nash for a year, but whatever.