Sarver's draft history

[Mainstreet]

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.

I really don't know. This move baffled me although the Suns moved Banks in the deal. I'm thinking that the Suns FO thought Shaq had more of what the team needed than what Marion provided and the deal was sort of a wash for two seasons as Marion might stay. I'm not sure what the Suns have in mind for his third season. I would hope the Suns already have a plan in place for Shaq's third year which might better the team.

 

[Treesquid PhD]

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.

No and that's what I am trying to get across, the Shaq deal was not about winning the title, the Suns paid a premium to get Shaq, it was about the built in fan base YJGS is talking about.

 

[Chaplin]

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.

Oh, I see. So everything that supports the argument that the owner is cheap is relevant, but everything that doesn't support it isn't.

 

[Chaplin]

No and that's what I am trying to get across, the Shaq deal was not about winning the title, the Suns paid a premium to get Shaq, it was about the built in fan base YJGS is talking about.

The Suns already have a built-in fanbase. Yes, it helped, but not as much as you people make it out to be.

 

[Treesquid PhD]

The Suns already have a built-in fanbase. Yes, it helped, but not as much as you people make it out to be.

Okay, but Sarver himself claims the Suns are in the 20's NBA market wise. I am not too sure how confident he is in the built in fan base when he is claiming the Suns have no market. Here is what he says

"In a relatively small market like Phoenix, we rely heavily on our sponsors and partners," he said. "Maintaining that relationship with a coach who interacts with those folks in a positive way is important."

He said an NBA consulting firm put Phoenix in the league's bottom third for expected revenue based on various demographics but that the Suns' revenue actually ranks in the top third.

See red highlighted, I think you get a clear picture into his thought process, there is a clear message that marketing image is as important as anything. There is no reason to believe this same philosophy isn't applied to players. So my point is that Sarver values players like Shaq that have built in markets and I expect to see personnel moves that emphasize this in the future, in other words the basketball skill is nice but not the main reason for moves by this team.

 

[asudevil83]

the thing that pisses me off the most is the 2010 pick. trading this pick now has the potential to destroy this franchise for along time.

09/10 Shaq and Nash expire.....great, i dont mind that. BUT, is this team really going to be good? NO. that year we will be a lotto team....AND Amare can opt out. he will.

Suns = No Shaq, No Nash, No Amare, No Draft = extremely despressing on 2010/11

 

[Mainstreet]

the thing that pisses me off the most is the 2010 pick. trading this pick now has the potential to destroy this franchise for along time.

09/10 Shaq and Nash expire.....great, i dont mind that. BUT, is this team really going to be good? NO. that year we will be a lotto team....AND Amare can opt out. he will.

Suns = No Shaq, No Nash, No Amare, No Draft = extremely despressing on 2010/11

I'm sure the Suns placed some protection on the pick. A good GM would have... nevermind.

 

[Treesquid PhD]

the thing that pisses me off the most is the 2010 pick. trading this pick now has the potential to destroy this franchise for along time.

09/10 Shaq and Nash expire.....great, i dont mind that. BUT, is this team really going to be good? NO. that year we will be a lotto team....AND Amare can opt out. he will.

Suns = No Shaq, No Nash, No Amare, No Draft = extremely despressing on 2010/11

It's not likely that the Suns ever get to the lottery point. One thing that is a fact, Sarver hater or not, this ownership group cares about short term revenues a lot, I doubt they just let the team fall apart, it's much more likely they make multiple moves to keep the team in the high 40's or low 50's before they tank it and lose a ton of season ticket holders. It will never get to the point where Nash and Shaq just fall off and Amare leaves, they will all be traded at some point.

 

[asudevil83]

It's not likely that the Suns ever get to the lottery point. One thing that is a fact, Sarver hater or not, this ownership group cares about short term revenues a lot, I doubt they just let the team fall apart, it's much more likely they make multiple moves to keep the team in the high 40's or low 50's before they tank it and lose a ton of season ticket holders. It will never get to the point where Nash and Shaq just fall off and Amare leaves, they will all be traded at some point.

what kind of multiple moves? its not like they have any tradeable assets. NO PICKS at all. Nash isnt being moved. Diaw CANT. Hill would just retire rather than being traded. Bell, MAYBE. Shaq? not until he's an expiring. Tucker, DJ? no value. Barbosa right now is the only thing i see being traded, other than Amare.

this team is OK now, but they've got nothing to build for the future with. they traded it all away to save money. think Timberwolves when the screwed themselves in the Joe Smith trade....losing multiple picks, and having a superstar and nothing to build around him with.

 

[YouJustGotSUNSD]

Oh, I see. So everything that supports the argument that the owner is cheap is relevant, but everything that doesn't support it isn't.

Thats just straight ignorant and insulting, Mr. Straw man.

My point was the shaq trade neither supports nor refutes the cheap argument, as it was a "smart business move" which very few GMs, let alone competent people, would decline.

Although I love how you explain that "everything that doesn't support an argument is irrelevant." In related news, the sky is blue, Iraq doesnt have any WMDs, and a 15 minute phone call to Geico can save you 15% or more on car insurance.

Lighten up, it may help your case.

 

[asudevil83]

I'm sure the Suns placed some protection on the pick. A good GM would have... nevermind.

they didnt....go ownership/management for having a look at the future

 

[Mainstreet]

Maybe the Suns can buy a pick for 3 million with the money they saved losing D'Antoni's contract or use the money to sign a FA. I'm being a bit sarcastic as I do not think there are any teams willing to sell a first round pick and second, I think the Suns just want to pocket the savings. The Suns FO has broken my little circle of trust.

 

[YouJustGotSUNSD]

the thing that pisses me off the most is the 2010 pick. trading this pick now has the potential to destroy this franchise for along time.

09/10 Shaq and Nash expire.....great, i dont mind that. BUT, is this team really going to be good? NO. that year we will be a lotto team....AND Amare can opt out. he will.

Suns = No Shaq, No Nash, No Amare, No Draft = extremely despressing on 2010/11

That's also like 55+ million dollars in salary room to make it an interesting 2010 summer!

 

[Mainstreet]

they didnt....go ownership/management for having a look at the future

The Suns FO is pretty predictable in how they do business. I was being sarcastic as I don't think the idea probably even dawned on them to add protection. Sad, Sad, Sad.

 

[carey]

That's also like 55+ million dollars in salary room to make it an interesting 2010 summer!

Agreed. You see how easily teams with cap room acquire draft picks through mid season deals. I think they will find a way to make lemonade out of oranges, but it's still 2 years down the line. What I wonder is what they will do after next year. We'll be stuck with old players and if we have an early fade in the playoffs we'll be looking to make major changes with no way to do so for another year.

 

[Treesquid PhD]

what kind of multiple moves? its not like they have any tradeable assets. NO PICKS at all. Nash isnt being moved. Diaw CANT. Hill would just retire rather than being traded. Bell, MAYBE. Shaq? not until he's an expiring. Tucker, DJ? no value. Barbosa right now is the only thing i see being traded, other than Amare.

this team is OK now, but they've got nothing to build for the future with. they traded it all away to save money. think Timberwolves when the screwed themselves in the Joe Smith trade....losing multiple picks, and having a superstar and nothing to build around him with.

Nash will be worth something to a contender. Look at what Dallas gave away for Kidd. Think about how bad LeBron would want Nash! Cleveland would give away a lot (unfortunately they have nothing but trash) Some team that is a point away and it happens often, might look at Nash.
Shaq will be worthless by then but as an expiring contract he will be worth someone decent to the Suns as an expirining contract we could get almost anyone who maybe had an off year and makes a ton of money...kind of like Peja's situation.
Shaq will always have value, be it here for marketing or somewhere else to ride the pine and fade away.
Amare has a ton of value, don't let the freaks on this board convince you Amare is an idiot that no one would want him because he doesn't pass well. All teams would want an Amare and what he brings in low post scoring and many would pay a great price at 25-27.

The Suns will make move and I cannot forsee what those are nor will I try, I just know in a league where 2 or 3 guys can change the team drastically, moves will happen.

 

[Covert Rain]

See red highlighted, I think you get a clear picture into his thought process, there is a clear message that marketing image is as important as anything. There is no reason to believe this same philosophy isn't applied to players. So my point is that Sarver values players like Shaq that have built in markets and I expect to see personnel moves that emphasize this in the future, in other words the basketball skill is nice but not the main reason for moves by this team.

That's where the problem lies. Yes, an owners dream is to get both out of players but Sarver strikes me as a market/business guy first. In the long run this will kill this team. I really hope that can see beyond that. Especially in a "small market" team like Phoenix....you need to win to stay relevant.

That's also like 55+ million dollars in salary room to make it an interesting 2010 summer!

That is sort depressing in a way. That means the Suns are starting over and going out and finding a couple big names. It also means the Suns would probably need a couple years to gel together with new guys etc. That window slamming shut is a depressing thing. Then again, we might get lucky and retool in 1 year like the Celtics. Do I dare dream?

 

[joshstmarie]

has it occured to anyone that out of all the draft picks we've traded NONE of those players would have helped us beat the spurs?

(gaurd tim duncan)

 

[Maligzar]

has it occured to anyone that out of all the draft picks we've traded NONE of those players would have helped us beat the spurs?

(gaurd tim duncan)

We had a fine strategy for Duncan, the problem was our inability to stop Parker/Ginobli. That's why the passing of two defensive minded point guards for picks stings so much.

 

[nowagimp]

has it occured to anyone that out of all the draft picks we've traded NONE of those players would have helped us beat the spurs?

(gaurd tim duncan)

how about rajon rondo helping to defend tony parker? How about a legitimate backup PG for nash?

 

[Covert Rain]

We had a fine strategy for Duncan, the problem was our inability to stop Parker/Ginobli. That's why the passing of two defensive minded point guards for picks stings so much.

how about rajon rondo helping to defend tony parker? How about a legitimate backup PG for nash?

Agreed. There is no way we could have been worse off with some of those guys on our team. I don't see how they couldn't have helped.

 

[Chaplin]

We had a fine strategy for Duncan, the problem was our inability to stop Parker/Ginobli. That's why the passing of two defensive minded point guards for picks stings so much.

Back then nobody EVER complained that we couldn't stop Parker/Ginobili. It was all about Tim Duncan. Period. Multiple threads on this board were dedicated to it. I remember years ago when everyone was upset if the Suns even entertained the thought of drafting a guard.

Hindsight is 20/20, and yes, now our biggest issue is stopping Parker and Ginobili. However, back then it wasn't the priority of Suns fans.

 

[Maligzar]

Back then nobody EVER complained that we couldn't stop Parker/Ginobili. It was all about Tim Duncan. Period. Multiple threads on this board were dedicated to it. I remember years ago when everyone was upset if the Suns even entertained the thought of drafting a guard.

Hindsight is 20/20, and yes, now our biggest issue is stopping Parker and Ginobili. However, back then it wasn't the priority of Suns fans.

Of course it was. We signed Raja Bell specifically to deal with Manu Ginobli. He ended up being known for his Kobe Bryant defense but that's not why he was brought in. He was brought in because Manu was killing us in the playoffs. I'm sure you remember the stink Manu made about it with his agent, because he has the same agent as Raja.

Since Steve got here we have been talking about needing a defensive minded point guard to back him up. A guy that can offer a change of pace by bringing more defense than offense so that teams have to prepare for both types of point guards.

So while you are correct that Duncan was our biggest problem, I don't feel you are being historically accurate claiming that we were never concerned about Manu and Tony. Ideally we wanted a guy to guard Duncan, but then again who doesn't? The Suns could have gotten a guy who would have helped this system, so Sarver's claim is just bogus.

 

[Covert Rain]

Back then nobody EVER complained that we couldn't stop Parker/Ginobili. It was all about Tim Duncan. Period. Multiple threads on this board were dedicated to it. I remember years ago when everyone was upset if the Suns even entertained the thought of drafting a guard.

Hindsight is 20/20, and yes, now our biggest issue is stopping Parker and Ginobili. However, back then it wasn't the priority of Suns fans.

I remember tons of people complaining about Parker and Ginobili too. In fact lots of people argued that you can't stop Tim period and you should concentrate on Parker/Ginobili. I think there were enough on both sides of the fence on that topic.

 

[joshstmarie]

how about rajon rondo helping to defend tony parker? How about a legitimate backup PG for nash?

rondo would have been nice but he hasnt done all that great of a job defending tony parker

this year parkers stats vs the celtics

17ppg 8ast 5rbs on 50% shooting - 1 game

last years

22ppg 4.5ast 2.5rbs on 60% shooting - 2 games

nash like defensive numbers if you ask me.

im not saying rondo is a bad player, id love to have him backing up steve nash but this dude has gotten alot of extra hype... the kid has 3 hall of famers playing next to him. those guys would make me look good running with em.