"If I'm a loser for four consecutive seasons, then maybe I should examine it.

[Yuma]

Really, I think Sarver has spent enough as an owner evidenced by how we are going into an almost unavoidable luxury tax situation. What others have pointed out is that money spent wisely? That's where I think having a GM learning on the job has hurt us. One can only hope Kerr turns out like Danny Ainge. Ainge was HORRIBLE as a GM when he first became a GM, IMHO. Then suddenly he has the Celtics as one of the best teams in the NBA. I can only hope he is not an Isiah Thomas as a GM.

 

[Chaplin]

You have to have both. Even top GMs are going to make mistakes sometimes, and the easiest way to recover from those mistakes is to spend more money. For example, it's looking likely that the Lakers made a mistake by giving Bynum a maximum extension a full year in advance, when he had looked good for really only a couple of months. But because they're willing to spend luxury tax, they don't really have to worry about being trapped behind his contract. Counting luxury tax, Bynum is going to cost them $25 million next season, and most teams couldn't dream of affording him at that price. Put a "budget-conscious" team in the same situation, and they'd be making horrible cost-cutting trades, or facing letting Gasol go, or pulling their punches in the summer free agent market.

Going back a few years, the Suns made a mistake with the Quentin Richardson signing. But, while they were still willing to spend big money, they erased that mistake by swapping Richardson for Kurt Thomas. It was only once the purse strings were tightened that the wheels came off.

Of course you don't have to have both. Wherever did you get that impression? Look at the Lakers? Buss hates spending a lot of money, he is definitely not an owner that is willing to spend money over the cap unless forced to. Much like Sarver.

 

[KloD]

Really, I think Sarver has spent enough as an owner evidenced by how we are going into an almost unavoidable luxury tax situation. What others have pointed out is that money spent wisely? That's where I think having a GM learning on the job has hurt us. One can only hope Kerr turns out like Danny Ainge. Ainge was HORRIBLE as a GM when he first became a GM, IMHO. Then suddenly he has the Celtics as one of the best teams in the NBA. I can only hope he is not an Isiah Thomas as a GM.

IMO Ainge hasn't really proven to be any more than an average GM. When it comes to trades, it's a bad GM that makes an average look good. The GM for Portland has done an amazing job retooling that team and it was with the draft.

Paul Allen was being run out of town just a few years ago, he had the team up for sale, the fans hated him. In a short time he is now viewed completely different again. Allen spent like crazy and produced a horrible product to represent the city, now he's spending far less and has a great product.

If you look at the Suns on Paper, they should be a top team. They have been a huge disappointment as far as living up to their potential. If they had, everyone would be calling Kerr and Sarver brilliant. The Suns are where the Blazers were a few years ago, hopefully they see that and take the same approach rather than trying to hold on. I suspect they let contracts run out this next year and start from there. Making trades and keeping essentially the same product in an attempt to keep the seats filled will be the short sighted approach. I'm still holding out hope that this management team will look at the big picture. Sure they've made mistakes, hindsight 20/20. I don't know of one owner/management team that hasn't and I can point to a few that have been far worse.

 

[elindholm]

Look at the Lakers? Buss hates spending a lot of money, he is definitely not an owner that is willing to spend money over the cap unless forced to. Much like Sarver.

You lost me here. The Lakers had a $75 million payroll this season, and that's before Bynum's extension kicks in. Unless they let both Odom and Ariza go for nothing this summer -- which they won't -- they'll be way, way into luxury tax territory next year.

 

[Chaplin]

You lost me here. The Lakers had a $75 million payroll this season, and that's before Bynum's extension kicks in. Unless they let both Odom and Ariza go for nothing this summer -- which they won't -- they'll be way, way into luxury tax territory next year.

So will we, what's your point? Are you saying that Buss has no problem spending into the luxury tax threshold? Because I will vehemently disagree with you there.

And Odom is as good as gone--probably not for nothing, but certainly if they can get youth in return and not owe as much money, they'll definitely do that.

 

[elindholm]

So will we, what's your point?

The Lakers' payroll will be at least $5 million higher than the Suns' next year, and it will very likely be $10 million higher.

Are you saying that Buss has no problem spending into the luxury tax threshold? Because I will vehemently disagree with you there.

When the Suns were (arguably) on the verge of a championship, the Suns dumped a key piece (Thomas) in order to save money. If the Lakers fall short this year, do you think they will do that? Not a chance.

And Odom is as good as gone--probably not for nothing, but certainly if they can get youth in return and not owe as much money, they'll definitely do that.

No one's going to give up young talent for Odom in a lucrative sign-and-trade. If Odom can't come to terms with the Lakers, he's on his own. And my guess is that they'll keep him, especially since Bynum is continuing to struggle.

 

[Andrew]

Isn't it a step in the right direction that he places a lot of the blame on himself for this team's struggles?

 

[CardsFan88]

Actually if Sarver recognizes the mistakes he has made and does not repeat them, he may well be on his way to becoming a good owner.

This would be good, if it was true, it could only help.

The problem I see is, $arver is about the short term bottom line, not the long term goal (build and maintain fanbase through consistently having playoff teams by spending what's necessary), and he doesn't see a way he can make $$$ and spend like that at the same time. Make the quarterly numbers, that's what a banker's mindset is probably geared for.

In sort of a self-reflective way (I believe) he announced to us that the way he is geared to run a business, and the way the Suns need to be run as a city trophy (for lack of a better word), might not work.

If I then continue on I would feel this means he is going to continue his way, albeit with lessons learned, (which may or may not change the 'next' decision), and if his way doesn't work, he'll be open to selling the team.

However it plays out, we're a step closer to whatever it is. But it still will take years.

 

[overseascardfan]

You have to have both. Even top GMs are going to make mistakes sometimes, and the easiest way to recover from those mistakes is to spend more money. For example, it's looking likely that the Lakers made a mistake by giving Bynum a maximum extension a full year in advance, when he had looked good for really only a couple of months. But because they're willing to spend luxury tax, they don't really have to worry about being trapped behind his contract. Counting luxury tax, Bynum is going to cost them $25 million next season, and most teams couldn't dream of affording him at that price. Put a "budget-conscious" team in the same situation, and they'd be making horrible cost-cutting trades, or facing letting Gasol go, or pulling their punches in the summer free agent market.

Going back a few years, the Suns made a mistake with the Quentin Richardson signing. But, while they were still willing to spend big money, they erased that mistake by swapping Richardson for Kurt Thomas. It was only once the purse strings were tightened that the wheels came off.

Right now POR seems to be the standard in a good ownership model. Paul Allen is the wealthiest owner and Kevin Pritchard has turned this team into a legitimate contender with an ensemble of young, cheap, talent. Amazingly POR is not in luxury tax land because they were able to rid themselves of bad contracts like Randolph, Patterson, etc. Plus they have cleaned up their image as well.

 

[elindholm]

Amazingly POR is not in luxury tax land because they were able to rid themselves of bad contracts like Randolph, Patterson, etc. Plus they have cleaned up their image as well.

Actually the Blazers were major luxury tax payers this year, thanks to Darius Miles's return to the NBA. They'll have a low payroll next season and then will have to make some decisions in the summer of 2010, when a lot of their players will be up for extensions. But I take your point.

 

[Chaplin]

Right now POR seems to be the standard in a good ownership model. Paul Allen is the wealthiest owner and Kevin Pritchard has turned this team into a legitimate contender with an ensemble of young, cheap, talent. Amazingly POR is not in luxury tax land because they were able to rid themselves of bad contracts like Randolph, Patterson, etc. Plus they have cleaned up their image as well.

But there were also bottom of the barrel for quite some time.

 

[Skkorpion]

But there were also bottom of the barrel for quite some time.

How many championships do they have and how many do we have?

 

[Darth Llama]

How many championships do they have and how many do we have?

Portland is only up on the Suns 1-0. Not like they're a world better then Phoenix, not at all. I don't think I would go so far as to call Portland a contender either. They didn't even get out of the 1st round.

 

[KloD]

But there were also bottom of the barrel for quite some time.

They went 4 years w/ a losing record prior to this year. They didn't have a great team the few years prior to that, but they still won 49 games.

The Suns should look at the Blazer model. In fact the Blazers were in far worse shape than the current Suns. At least the Suns have expiring contracts and aren't hated by everyone and their mother.

 

[BC867]

How many championships do they have and how many do we have?

The answers are one and zero. Mathematically, zero into one equals infinity.

The difference between something and nothing.

It's all in the algebra.

 

[Chaplin]

The answers are one and zero. Mathematically, zero into one equals infinity.

The difference between something and nothing.

It's all in the algebra.

Please, NBA championships are great, but don't start thinking that a 31 year old championship means all that much in any argument about current teams. I mean, come on now.

At least the Laker fans have some recent ammunition to back up their taunts.