Player changes so far.

[Errntknght]

If the Suns actually draft two guys next year then I'll retroactively forgive them for selling #27 this year.

I love the way you misstate things - as if you knew they couldn't draft a player this year who could 'play' and next year the could certainly draft ones that could. We all know its always somewhat of a crapshoot in the late first round - next year the odds figure to be somewhat better than this year, and thats all you can say. On the other hand if you draft this year, you have a years head start on developing the player should you get lucky and find a keeper.

 

[Evil Ash]

Second, why did it have to Banks OR Thomas? Why not both? After all, with the trade exemption starting at 3.6, couldn't they have swung a trade with Minny for him considering that's about where his contract is starting anyway? An you'd think Minny would be happier getting SOMETHING for Banks, TE and maybe even a 2nd round pick, than losing him for nothing, which is what happened. Thus, you could have gotten Thomas back AND traded fo Banks.

Since no team had the Bird rights to either of those players the Suns were limited to signing to one or the other for the MLE or below. There have been many sources saying that Nash was begging behind the scenes for a backup so they made it more of a priority.

 

[Chaplin]

If the Suns actually draft two guys next year then I'll retroactively forgive them for selling #27 this year.

I love the way you misstate things - as if you knew they couldn't draft a player this year who could 'play' and next year the could certainly draft ones that could. We all know its always somewhat of a crapshoot in the late first round - next year the odds figure to be somewhat better than this year, and thats all you can say. On the other hand if you draft this year, you have a years head start on developing the player should you get lucky and find a keeper.

However, the scouts have not been exclusively looking at this year's players--they have been looking at next year's as well, and if they project that a guy at 27 this year doesn't have the ceiling as several guys projected to go 27 next year, why not give up the pick this year for something your scouts and administration deem to be a much better chance to get a better player?

 

[Cheesebeef]

Since no team had the Bird rights to either of those players the Suns were limited to signing to one or the other for the MLE or below. There have been many sources saying that Nash was begging behind the scenes for a backup so they made it more of a priority.

that's right - I forgot about the Minnesota Bird rights thing with Banks - that's a good point. Still, reason would have it that since we offered TT most of the MLE right off the bat, he was the priority and not signing a bacm-up PG, except for the "suns discount" anyway.

I'm also happy to see Banks did slip through the cracks - he's a solid in the now and could be the starting PG in the future.

 

[Joe Mama]

I'm actually not sold that Tim Thomas was the Phoenix Suns top priority in the off-season. I think they made the pathetic offer because they figured at that price he would be too good to pass on. They also probably suspected, and rightfully so, that the public would be upset if they didn't even make an attempt to re-sign him. I really don't think they wanted Tim Thomas unless they were going to get came at a bargain-basement deal. That should probably tell us a lot about what the Phoenix Suns thought of their priorities and more importantly what they thought of Tim Thomas, even after his impressive playoffs.

Joe Mama

 

[Errntknght]

Chaplin, "However, the scouts have not been exclusively looking at this year's players--they have been looking at next year's as well, and if they project that a guy at 27 this year doesn't have the ceiling as several guys projected to go 27 next year, why not give up the pick this year for something your scouts and administration deem to be a much better chance to get a better player?"

I'm sure a dyed-in-the-wool homer can look at the way the Suns have been ducking out of the draft for the last several years and conclude they are very astute at drafting but I take a simple view - you avoid what you're not good at and embrace what you are good at.

 

[JCSunsfan]

I'm actually not sold that Tim Thomas was the Phoenix Suns top priority in the off-season. I think they made the pathetic offer because they figured at that price he would be too good to pass on. They also probably suspected, and rightfully so, that the public would be upset if they didn't even make an attempt to re-sign him. I really don't think they wanted Tim Thomas unless they were going to get came at a bargain-basement deal. That should probably tell us a lot about what the Phoenix Suns thought of their priorities and more importantly what they thought of Tim Thomas, even after his impressive playoffs.

Joe Mama

I think you are pretty close there Joe. My take is that TT had said he would be willing to play here for cheap, so they made him a cheap offer--hoping to pick up a very good roster player for very little. But, no, he was not the priority of the off-season.

If he was, he would be on the team right now.

They needed pg help more and made an offer that they though would allow them to get decent pg help. When it didn't work out for TT, it just so happened that they were able to sign a better pg than they expect they would.

 

[Chaplin]

I'm sure a dyed-in-the-wool homer can look at the way the Suns have been ducking out of the draft for the last several years and conclude they are very astute at drafting but I take a simple view - you avoid what you're not good at and embrace what you are good at.

Um, Errntknght, I didn't say anything about the quality of our scouting staff. I simply provided a somewhat logical reason for giving up on any of the players that were available at #27 this year. Simple as that. My theory postulates that a) all players at #27 THIS year were projected to not be worth the chance that they'll be good, and b) the players that could be had next year at #27 (or around that number) are much more worth it. Whether you buy into the hype that next year's draft will be the best in 20 years is beside the point--it matters what the Suns brain trust thinks--and I think the opinion that they like next year's draft better than this year's holds a lot of water.

 

[Errntknght]

Another logical explanation for selling the #27 pick was that the Suns brain trust misread the situation and banked on being able to move up in the draft and so neglected to do their homework for the 27th pick - then spun the story. (One way not to find a player you want is to not look.) I think this theory holds lots of water, too.

Heck, everyone's opinion is that next year's draft is generally better than this one, so yeah that part of your theory does hold water. It doesn't mean that Suns drafters have a solid grasp of who will be available in the late first round next year and how they stack up against who was available this year.

 

[Chaplin]

Another logical explanation for selling the #27 pick was that the Suns brain trust misread the situation and banked on being able to move up in the draft and so neglected to do their homework for the 27th pick - then spun the story. (One way not to find a player you want is to not look.) I think this theory holds lots of water, too.

There was some discussion about the Suns doing some scouting on Sergio Rodriguez, so it's not like they ignored guys that might be available at the #27 pick. They brought in several late draft prospects, so I'm not sure where you get this idea that they didn't do their homework.

Heck, everyone's opinion is that next year's draft is generally better than this one, so yeah that part of your theory does hold water. It doesn't mean that Suns drafters have a solid grasp of who will be available in the late first round next year and how they stack up against who was available this year.

The way the team is so concerned with the bottom line, don't you find it hard to believe that they don't have any idea how next year is going to stack out? Heck, I'll bet that "throw in" Cleveland pick in the #21 trade was a big deal when they were making that trade. So I would say that the Suns have at least a good idea of what will be available next year.

 

[Joe Mama]

Another logical explanation for selling the #27 pick was that the Suns brain trust misread the situation and banked on being able to move up in the draft and so neglected to do their homework for the 27th pick - then spun the story. (One way not to find a player you want is to not look.) I think this theory holds lots of water, too.

Heck, everyone's opinion is that next year's draft is generally better than this one, so yeah that part of your theory does hold water. It doesn't mean that Suns drafters have a solid grasp of who will be available in the late first round next year and how they stack up against who was available this year.

Each team scouts the hell out of about every player in the top 50 or so. Some teams like some players more than others. Some teams, like the Phoenix Suns, don't want to screw around with rookies taken at the end of the first round when they are making a run at a championship. They would rather use the roster spot on a veteran who can be dumped after a year life Sean Marks. I can't even blame them if they just would rather have the $3 million. Heck, that will probably cover any luxury taxes they rack up this year.

By most accounts the Phoenix Suns have a list of about 12 players they like in this year's draft. That does not mean that they failed to scout the other players well enough.

Joe

 

[elindholm]

They would rather use the roster spot on a veteran who can be dumped after a year life Sean Marks.

I know I'm not posting anymore, but this error has become so prevalent that I have to say something. I just had to wait until I could call out someone that I knew wouldn't be offended.

Remember that, under the new CBA, first-round rookie contracts are guaranteed for only two years. With the annual raises figured in, this cuts down the total guaranteed amount by almost 40% compared to before.

I can't remember whether Marks's deal is for one or two years. In the case of Piatkowski, though, whose two years are guaranteed, the contract-duration savings as compared to a first-round pick are right around zero. We can quibble over luxury tax implications and how much of the contract is paid by whom, but the bottom line is that it isn't much more cost effective to go with veteran non-contributors at the expense of rookie longshots.

 

[George O'Brien]

Lurking again Eric?

You are right.

1st year salary is guaranteed
2nd year salary is guaranteed
3rd year salary is a team option
4th year team option shows percentage increase over 3rd year salary
Qualifying offer is percentage increase over 4th year

http://www.insidehoops.com/salaries-rookies.shtml

Hoopshype has Pike in for two years and Marks for one. I think the difference is whether there is partial subsidy by the league. If there is a subsidy, then it is a two year minimum, but can be just one if ther is no subsidy.

 

[Chaplin]

Aren't the teams responsible for a rookie's entire contract, where they are only responsible for half of a veteran's who has signed at the minimum? Dollars and cents-wise, then, isn't a vet minimum contract better for the bottom line then a late first rounder? (That is not a talent comparison, just a money comparison)

 

[Mainstreet]

Aren't the teams responsible for a rookie's entire contract, where they are only responsible for half of a veteran's who has signed at the minimum? Dollars and cents-wise, then, isn't a vet minimum contract better for the bottom line then a late first rounder? (That is not a talent comparison, just a money comparison)

Financially, that's my take. Also veteran minimum players I don't think count towards the cap as I understand it.

Also there's the get what you pay for theory as well.

Additionally as I understand it, rookie contracts need to only be guaranteed for two years so I don't think we're talking about a lot of money though on late first round picks.

 

[Joe Mama]

They would rather use the roster spot on a veteran who can be dumped after a year life Sean Marks.

I know I'm not posting anymore, but this error has become so prevalent that I have to say something. I just had to wait until I could call out someone that I knew wouldn't be offended.

Remember that, under the new CBA, first-round rookie contracts are guaranteed for only two years. With the annual raises figured in, this cuts down the total guaranteed amount by almost 40% compared to before.

I can't remember whether Marks's deal is for one or two years. In the case of Piatkowski, though, whose two years are guaranteed, the contract-duration savings as compared to a first-round pick are right around zero. We can quibble over luxury tax implications and how much of the contract is paid by whom, but the bottom line is that it isn't much more cost effective to go with veteran non-contributors at the expense of rookie longshots.

That's why I used Marks' deal as an example and not Piatkowski's.

I'm not really happy with that second guaranteed year on his contract. Of course they could simply cut him free and use some of that $3 million to pay the part of his contract and are responsible for with minimum deals. That would still leave them with around $2.4 million.

Joe

 

[JCSunsfan]

Another logical explanation for selling the #27 pick was that the Suns brain trust misread the situation and banked on being able to move up in the draft and so neglected to do their homework for the 27th pick - then spun the story. (One way not to find a player you want is to not look.) I think this theory holds lots of water, too.

Heck, everyone's opinion is that next year's draft is generally better than this one, so yeah that part of your theory does hold water. It doesn't mean that Suns drafters have a solid grasp of who will be available in the late first round next year and how they stack up against who was available this year.

I find it much easir to believe that a team just didn't want any players that were available to them late in the first round of a poor draft, than to believe that a team with a #27 pick didn't bother to scout who would be available at their pick because the wanted to move up.

In fact, I find the first idea preposterous--whether its the Suns or someone else. These teams have scouts who do NOTHING but scout potential draft picks all year long.

I know you all think so poorly of Pike, but it seems that the Suns powers that be just believe a veteran shooter like Piatkowski will be of more use to the Suns in a championship run than anyone they would have picked up at #27. In fact, it seems that they really didn't even want to bother with a rookie this year unless he was a really good one.

Disagree with the choice they made all you want, but that theory best explains their actions.

 

[F-Dog]

The Suns didn't like Ager for some reason, and they were being bitchy because Sergio Rodriguez refused to stay in Europe until the Suns called him over.

Still, it's hard to believe the team wouldn't be better off with Steve Novak or Alexander Johnson locked in for the next two years, instead of $3m in the owner's pocket. Novak in particular is supposed to have been outstanding in summer league; it might have been worth the extra $50k in cap space just to keep him away from the Rockets.



Even if Marks gets significant minutes this year, it just means the Suns cheaped out in filling their last spot--far from exceeding the luxury tax, they won't even be approaching it. I don't see a possible turn of events this year where the #27/Marks business looks anything less than disgraceful.

 

[Mainstreet]

The Suns didn't like Ager for some reason, and they were being bitchy because Sergio Rodriguez refused to stay in Europe until the Suns called him over.

Still, it's hard to believe the team wouldn't be better off with Steve Novak or Alexander Johnson locked in for the next two years, instead of $3m in the owner's pocket. Novak in particular is supposed to have been outstanding in summer league; it might have been worth the extra $50k in cap space just to keep him away from the Rockets.



Even if Marks gets significant minutes this year, it just means the Suns cheaped out in filling their last spot--far from exceeding the luxury tax, they won't even be approaching it. I don't see a possible turn of events this year where the #27/Marks business looks anything less than disgraceful.

I think you have this right.

The curious thing for me is why the Suns were all over EP early as a FA when he (himself) said something to the effect he thought his only option might be retirement. I don't exactly remember how he worded the comment I read somewhere. My only hope is that the Suns figure that he will be so wide open, and with his additional height, he will be able to score better than Eddie House over opposing defenses at least in the playoffs.

I do remember this. The Suns liked EP all the way back to when he was drafted and always spoke highly of him. He does seem like a real good character person but I want a little more. Who knows? Maybe EP has a little gas left in the tank for the Suns to give him a two year guaranteed contract. The Suns must have thought there would be some demand for him.

 

[Errntknght]

Thanks for coming out of hiding to make those points, Eric.

There is another aspect of a contract like Marks compared to a rookie 1st rounder. Suppose Marks, like Hunter, shows a little something - the odds are he'll do the same thing Hunter did, bolt for 3mil or so. If the rookie pans out you can hang onto him for four years for a small salary. Since we are facing Lux Tax issues it would be extremely helpful to have some of the low level contributors be on rookie contracts - at least we won't have to scramble every year to replace anyone who actually contributed and then moved on.


Chap, "Aren't the teams responsible for a rookie's entire contract, where they are only responsible for half of a veteran's who has signed at the minimum?"

Sure they're responsible for all of draft picks salary but they are responsible for the amount of a vet min salary of a 2 year player - not half. In other words a fixed amount which is 60,000 less than a #27 pick - $744,551 is the number for 2006-7. That same amount is the Lux Tax hit for every player signed as a FA to a minimum contract.


George, "I think the difference is whether there is partial subsidy by the league. If there is a subsidy, then it is a two year minimum, but can be just one if ther is no subsidy."

Exactly backwards as I read the CBA FAQ - the league subsidizes 10-day, rest-of-year and one year minimum contracts for vets with 3 or more years in the league. It does not mention subsidizing two year contracts. Maybe we signed Pike to two one year contracts. There is no league subsidy for players with 0, 1, or 2 years in the league.

 

[Joe Mama]

Errntknght, which center drafted 27 or later were you going to take instead of using that roster spot on Sean Marks? Do you see one that you think will contribute to a championship run more than him? I can see your argument with taking Ager instead of signing Pike even though I don't really have a problem with it.


Even if his deal is not subsidized at all (don't know if his second year is an option or whether that would affect whether it is subsidized or not) the Phoenix Suns received $3 million for that draft pick. And it's enough to pay Pike's salary over the next two years as well as their part of Marks' salary. The Phoenix Suns also get good veteran presen and ce in the locker room and experience, if it's needed, off the bench.

Joe

 

[nowagimp]

The Suns didn't like Ager for some reason, and they were being bitchy because Sergio Rodriguez refused to stay in Europe until the Suns called him over.

Supposedly Ager cant shoot, so would hurt spacing. Sergio cant defend, and the suns cant have the likes of him pike and Marks coming in to give up leads. Nash is a lock down defender compared with sergio(sarcasm). The suns lost 2 good 3pt shooters(TT, House), and had/have defensive liabilities at the guard position, so adding a poor shooter or bad defenders at guard would aggravate their weaknesses. Maybe, just maybe, the suns have better flexibility for next years 3 draft picks. They wont have to dump(at cost) rookies that dont pan out this year, could just not resign marks, and pike is 1/2 price(1/2 of the min). With contracts for Leo and Boris hanging in the air, it would be a shame to lose the flexibility to sign a few good players in next years draft. And if the suns have poor flexibility to sign those picks, you can bet other teams will know it, and steal them for cheap.

 

[George O'Brien]

The guy I was intrigued by was Alexander Johnson. The scounting reports are that he has serious hops and now that he's in shape, could be a good player. Of course, he'd probably turn out to a Tischer.

 

[F-Dog]

Maybe, just maybe, the suns have better flexibility for next years 3 draft picks. They wont have to dump(at cost) rookies that dont pan out this year, could just not resign marks, and pike is 1/2 price(1/2 of the min).

This is a joke, right? the difference between the pick's salary and (what the Suns pay of) Pike's is $50k. Plus, IIRC the only first-round pick in recent history who's been unmoveable by the following summer was Julius Hodge, and I think he had a serious injury.



It looks like the Suns will carry 13 this year, which is the number they're required to carry. They certainly haven't moved into luxury tax territory yet. What exactly is that $3m supposed to be buying again? Is Sarver not even willing to spend up to the luxtax if the Suns don't sell their draft first?

 

[George O'Brien]

This is a joke, right? the difference between the pick's salary and (what the Suns pay of) Pike's is $50k. Plus, IIRC the only first-round pick in recent history who's been unmoveable by the following summer was Julius Hodge, and I think he had a serious injury.

It looks like the Suns will carry 13 this year, which is the number they're required to carry. They certainly haven't moved into luxury tax territory yet. What exactly is that $3m supposed to be buying again? Is Sarver not even willing to spend up to the luxtax if the Suns don't sell their draft first?

Any your point is?

I know you think Sarver is simply cheap. I'm not convinced. Somehow with a team with over $60 million in salaries this coming season and the likelyhood of adding another $10 million next years - is that CHEAP? Odd definition if you asked me.

This constant dripping sarcasm gets old. Obviously the Suns management doesn't consult you on their decisions such as to go with veterans rather than rookies and you're PO'ed. How dare they ignore all your brilliant, sage advice? If only they had listened, then .....

Then what?

See, sarcasm is easy. I can do it. Anybody can do it. But if it irritates you, then imagine how everyone else feels with this constant drivel about how cheap Sarver is and how stupid we are if we disagree you.