Sarver's draft history

[Griffin]

The Suns draft history since Sarver took over the team is well documented on this board, but it bears repeating.

1st round draft picks traded by the Phoenix Suns since Sarver took over:

PICK	YEAR	HOW?		PLAYERS TRADED AWAY	RESOURCES OBTAINED		PLAYER DRAFTED		RECIPIENT	STILL ON BOARD

 7th	2004	own		-			2005 1st round pick (21st)	Loul Deng		Bulls		Andre Iguodala, Andris Biedrins, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, Kevin Martin
21st	2005	Bulls (Deng)	Quentin Richardson	Kurt Thomas			Nate Robinson		Knicks		Francisco Garcia, Luther Head, David Lee
21st	2006	Hawks (JJ)	Brian Grant		2007 1st round pick (24th)	Rajon Rondo		Celtics		Kyle Lowry, Jordan Farmar
27th	2006	own		-			cash considerations		Sergio Rodriguez	Blazers		Daniel Gibson, Paul Millsap
24th	2007	Celtics (Rondo)	James Jones		cash considerations		Rudy Fernandez		Blazers		Carl Landry, Glen Davis
24th	2008	own		Kurt Thomas		conditional 2nd-round pick	?			Sonics
?	2010	own		Kurt Thomas						?			Sonics

In the last four drafts:

• Number of 1st round picks traded (including future picks): 7
• Number of 1st round picks sold for cash or given away to reduce payroll: 4
• Number of 1st round picks obtained via trades: 2 (both subsequently traded)
• Number of 1st round picks used: 1 (Alando Tucker, 29th, 2007)

Over the next three drafts, the Suns currently own two first round draft picks (15th this year and their own in 2009).

The 15th pick this year will earn approximately $3M during the first two seasons. If the Suns keep the pick, it will likely cost them an additional $3M in luxury tax, unless other trades are made to reduce the payroll.

So what can we expect in this year's draft?

 

[dodie53]

 

[dreamcastrocks]

more trades.

 

[da_suns_fan]

We should add the spin that was said when these picks were all traded away. Thats the best part.

The latest garbage is how Sarver claims that the Suns have given out more dollars in contracts than any team in since he took over.

Thats rich for two reasons:

1) The Suns payroll was drastically cut for him when he purchased the team (as what happens whenever a franchise was sold). By leage rules, he had to give out more contracts.

2) He's taking credit for contracts that he traded away. He gave Quinten Richardson a contract which he traded for Kurt Thomas' contract which he traded (along with two first round picks) for nothing.

 

[joshstmarie]

How many more sarver hate threads do we really need? I guess you could go with the "this is a draft post" excuse but this is all stuff that gets rehashed every other day when a sarver argument erupts.


I could reel off the sarver draft flukes faster than my social security number because you all bring it up so much.

 

[Chaplin]

And yet, only one of those picks was in the top 20. ONE! And that pick was traded probably on the authority of BC, not Sarver.

These hate threads are ridiculous. Time to start a brand new subforum for these.

 

[JCSunsfan]

And yet, only one of those picks was in the top 20. ONE! And that pick was traded probably on the authority of BC, not Sarver.

These hate threads are ridiculous. Time to start a brand new subforum for these.

Not quite right. We do not know where the future pick(s) will be. Unprotected at a time when we might be rebuilding.

The Kurt Thomas trade is right there with the Rick Robey trade. But at least with Robey, we were TRYING to improve basketballwise.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

And yet, only one of those picks was in the top 20. ONE! And that pick was traded probably on the authority of BC, not Sarver.

These hate threads are ridiculous. Time to start a brand new subforum for these.

you're right chap, picks later than 20 are worthless. you can't build a team with a finley, a ceballos, a parker, a barbosa, a boozer, an okur, oh wait . . . those players HELP a team?

 

[Mainstreet]

And yet, only one of those picks was in the top 20. ONE! And that pick was traded probably on the authority of BC, not Sarver.

I've always wondered about that #7 pick. I've always had the hunch Sarver was in the save money mode so BC tried to stash the future pick he received where it would be safe (in Chicago) but obviously that didn't work. However, BC also received a high second round pick from Chicago which turned out to be Vroman (bad selection). Anyway, even when the trade went south one can see the workings of a good GM trying to make the best lemonade. Personally I thought BC was too smart to make the trade of #7 in advance of the selection unless he was influenced. I guess fans will never know for sure the inner workings of that trade.

 

[Griffin]

How many more sarver hate threads do we really need? I guess you could go with the "this is a draft post" excuse but this is all stuff that gets rehashed every other day when a sarver argument erupts.


I could reel off the sarver draft flukes faster than my social security number because you all bring it up so much.

And yet, only one of those picks was in the top 20. ONE! And that pick was traded probably on the authority of BC, not Sarver.

These hate threads are ridiculous. Time to start a brand new subforum for these.

I guess I should have simply called the thread "Suns recent draft history" and then that would have been fine. I suppose it's just a coincidence then that during the last four years, a period that coincides with Sarver's ownership of the team, the Suns have sold more first round picks for cash or otherwise given them away without compensation than they have done so in their previous 36 years of existence, or that the Suns have drafted fewer rookies in the last four years than in any other four-year stretch in their history. To me, that is a very shortsighted management strategy that will only continue to cost us more and more into the future.

Yes, all but the first of those picks were lower than 20th. Yet, strangely enough, the one pick we actually used to draft a player was lowest of them all (29th), which, also coincidently, carried the lowest guaranteed salary of them all.

I don't really care whether anyone blames Sarver or the scouting staff or whomever for this, but it is a problem that needs to be acknowledged.

 

[joshstmarie]

not to sound snooty but i believe this problem has been acknowledged for some time now, especially by us fans.

kerr wants the rookies to get more playing time and to develop with the team, that sounds pretty encouraging to me.

dantoni is over in NY with the #6 pick in his pocket saying "well we know hes not going to contribute right away" i think HALF the problem is out the door.

 

[Ryanwb]

Yes, Sarver's tenure as the GM has been horrible

 

[arwillan]

all i can say to people still complaining about these drafts is hindsight is 20/20.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

all i can say to people still complaining about these drafts is hindsight is 20/20.

huh?

so those of us that wanted rondo (that's called foresight) are allowed to bitch. where do we have that sign up sheet?

also, everytime anyone makes an error are people not supposed to speak of it b/c it's "20/20 hindsight?" that means that people won't learn from past mistakes and that people will not be capable of developing patterns of conduct to determine (within a certain degree) what will happen in the future.

oh, and finally, this is a message board. complaining comes with the territory.

 

[Griffin]

not to sound snooty but i believe this problem has been acknowledged for some time now, especially by us fans.

But has it been acknowledged by management? I have not heard anything to that effect. I would like to believe that with the 15th pick this year, the Suns won't make the same mistakes they have over the last four drafts and actually draft someone with potential to contribute.

But, at the same time, with our payroll where it is, and the salary + LT that a mid-first round pick would entail, my question is: will we actually use the pick, and if so, will that mean someone else will have to go? Giricek not re-signed?

 

[Covert Rain]

And that pick was traded probably on the authority of BC, not Sarver.

Have to disagree with you on this one Chap. The word was that part of rift between BC and Sarver was this very subject. BC wanted to make moves to improve the team and Sarver wanted to make moves to save money.

 

[Chaplin]

Have to disagree with you on this one Chap. The word was that part of rift between BC and Sarver was this very subject. BC wanted to make moves to improve the team and Sarver wanted to make moves to save money.

And I have to disagree with you. Why does everybody think Sarver came here with his handlebar moustache right away with no concern for winning? It is mindboggling that you people buy into that crap.

 

[Covert Rain]

And I have to disagree with you. Why does everybody think Sarver came here with his handlebar moustache right away with no concern for winning? It is mindboggling that you people buy into that crap.

Come on Chap. There is more then enough evidence since he has come here to draw conclusions that Sarver 1st concern probably is not winning a title. I don't think that makes him a bad guy. It just means he is a business man first. You don't have to buy into anything when the evidence is right in front of you.

I am still willing to give Sarver the benefit of the doubt until this off season is over. If he really does make some moves and uses the draft to make our bench deeper great. However, if sells off our 1st rounder again this year....I don't see how any of you could draw any other conclusion.

 

[arwillan]

huh?

so those of us that wanted rondo (that's called foresight) are allowed to bitch. where do we have that sign up sheet?

also, everytime anyone makes an error are people not supposed to speak of it b/c it's "20/20 hindsight?" that means that people won't learn from past mistakes and that people will not be capable of developing patterns of conduct to determine (within a certain degree) what will happen in the future.

oh, and finally, this is a message board. complaining comes with the territory.

Sarver clearly did not know that all of the players left on the board were going to be as good as they are now. Has it ever crossed anyone's mind that just maybe he thought we could win with what we had (which we came darn close to doing a couple years)? Sure having deng or one of those guys would have been wonderful over our past couple of runs, but you can't blame sarver now for what he did back then before he knew how good any of these players would be. So regardless of the mistakes sarver has made, it is unnecessary to keep beating the dead horse about draft mistakes. We can blame nash and amare and marion and everyone else on the team for our lack of a championship too, it's not only the owner's fault.

 

[Chaplin]

Come on Chap. There is more then enough evidence since he has come here to draw conclusions that Sarver 1st concern probably is not winning a title. I don't think that makes him a bad guy. It just means he is a business man first. You don't have to buy into anything when the evidence is right in front of you.

I am still willing to give Sarver the benefit of the doubt until this off season is over. If he really does make some moves and uses the draft to make our bench deeper great. However, if sells off our 1st rounder again this year....I don't see how any of you could draw any other conclusion.

I'm saying there is no evidence whatsoever that us trading that #7 pick in 2004 had anything to do with Sarver. Remember, BC and JC had a good amount of power at that time. I know it's easy to blame everything that's bad in the world on Robert Sarver, but there's got to be a line somewhere.

 

[Covert Rain]

I'm saying there is no evidence whatsoever that us trading that #7 pick in 2004 had anything to do with Sarver. Remember, BC and JC had a good amount of power at that time. I know it's easy to blame everything that's bad in the world on Robert Sarver, but there's got to be a line somewhere.

I know what your saying. However, I also remember JC on KTAR saying that they were meeting with the investment group and Sarver for over a year and that one of the stipulations were that the Suns clean up payroll, reduce expenses in order for the deal to EVER happen.

Sounds like to me that from that standpoint Sarver and his group has some say in the Suns decisions even pre-sale.

 

[Treesquid PhD]

I'm saying there is no evidence whatsoever that us trading that #7 pick in 2004 had anything to do with Sarver. Remember, BC and JC had a good amount of power at that time. I know it's easy to blame everything that's bad in the world on Robert Sarver, but there's got to be a line somewhere.

Agreed, I don't think Sarver has much to do with those past moves, they don't smell like Sarver they smell and feel like BC. The Real Sarver is what we are seeing with the Shaq move, he is going to be an owner that spends money in the effort to sell jerseys and tickets, that is why we will see this same team with Shaq and Nash until it completely collapses and then I doubt they will ever fully blow it up, this ownership group will keep the Suns in late 90's mode (winning 50 and out in the first) subbing in hasbeen stars for draft picks and young players I don't think they can really afford to eat the 8K in season ticket losses it will take to rebuild.

 

[Mainstreet]

I really want to buy into the Shaq trade, however, the Suns lost some flexibility going forward. Marion might have opted out this coming season season or at worse he was an expiring contract and might have had trade value. IMO, the Suns reached for Shaq liked Dallas reached for Kidd. I think both moves were made out of desperation because of the KG and Gasol trades.

 

[Chaplin]

I really want to buy into the Shaq trade, however, the Suns lost some flexibility going forward. Marion might have opted out this coming season season or at worse he was an expiring contract and might have had trade value. IMO, the Suns reached for Shaq liked Dallas reached for Kidd. I think both moves were made out of desperation because of the KG and Gasol trades.

That may be true. But honestly, is the Shaq move really a move that a cheap owner would make?? I don't think it is, and yet he gets slammed with the "cheap" label all the time.

 

[YouJustGotSUNSD]

The shaq move was a smart move from a front office point of view. You get a guaranteed fanbase, a surge in interest, and a wealth of new endorsements/merchandise.

It's a move a "cheap" or "generous" owner would do, making it irrelevant in the argument.