jandaman
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
- Posts
- 1,263
- Reaction score
- 3
You implied that Lewis's contract isnt all that bad.... for the magic.
Suns offer Amare maximum contract extension worth an estimated $110 million
- Thread starter Roca Dolla
- Start date
You implied that Lewis's contract isnt all that bad.... for the magic.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Posts
- 46,247
- Reaction score
- 11,850
I didn't do that either. Unbelievable.
This whole debate on whether to give amare the max has gotten out of
control.
It's worth pointing out that both LA and Portland have huge defensive front lines, 2 of
the best in the league. This clearly contributed to Amare's rebounding woes. I'm not saying he is a great re bounder but it's worth pointing out that in game one perkins and garnett combined for 7 rebounds. Less than half their average.
We took the best team in years to six games in the wcf. By all accounts the team chemistry is the best it's been in maybe forever. Outside of a trade there is NO viable replacement for Amare. Kerr stated on ktar that the suns would have less than 9 mil in cap space if Amare bolts. On top of that there are a ton of teams with massive cap space to compete with for FA's. Without Amare no one will view the suns as a contender,further hampering our efforts. If we were bounced in round one or didn't
make the playoffs it would be a vastly different story.
I'm sure no one really wants to give Amare a max deal especially Sarver. But all
aspects have to be taken into account. In this case the alternative
is not nice.....
control.
It's worth pointing out that both LA and Portland have huge defensive front lines, 2 of
the best in the league. This clearly contributed to Amare's rebounding woes. I'm not saying he is a great re bounder but it's worth pointing out that in game one perkins and garnett combined for 7 rebounds. Less than half their average.
We took the best team in years to six games in the wcf. By all accounts the team chemistry is the best it's been in maybe forever. Outside of a trade there is NO viable replacement for Amare. Kerr stated on ktar that the suns would have less than 9 mil in cap space if Amare bolts. On top of that there are a ton of teams with massive cap space to compete with for FA's. Without Amare no one will view the suns as a contender,further hampering our efforts. If we were bounced in round one or didn't
make the playoffs it would be a vastly different story.
I'm sure no one really wants to give Amare a max deal especially Sarver. But all
aspects have to be taken into account. In this case the alternative
is not nice.....
Chaplin
Better off silent
I still think the issue is years, not money. That's why I think that 110 number is false. I think we probably already offered him a reasonable dollar figure, but not enough years to suit him.
Plus, it makes no sense for him to ask for the absolute maximum and his answer depending on how the team will improve when the simple act of him signing hampers the team's ability to improve.
I don't really want them to give him a 6-year contract, but I bet he's asking for something along the lines of a 6/90 contract.
Plus, it makes no sense for him to ask for the absolute maximum and his answer depending on how the team will improve when the simple act of him signing hampers the team's ability to improve.
I don't really want them to give him a 6-year contract, but I bet he's asking for something along the lines of a 6/90 contract.
I am with you Chap. I think most of the articles up to this point have been around the Suns offering fewer years or less money. At least that is what I thought I read. Also, I still have not see anybody else report this yet.
Last edited:
ASUCHRIS
ONE HEART BEAT!!!
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2002
- Posts
- 16,476
- Reaction score
- 14,621
I wouldn't love it, but I could live with it.
It would be very hard to complain about that deal. That's $15M per year. Even if he misses one year for another micro-fracture, it works out to $18M/yr over five years (not cap-wise, but you get the idea), which is still slightly cheaper than Rashard Lewis's contract.
joshstmarie
Hall of Famer
IMO I highly doubt amare is looking for anything less than max years/money. Why would he settle for anything less???
Chaplin
Better off silent
It's already been reported months ago that it isn't necessarily max MONEY he's looking for, but rather max YEARS. A high salary, of course, but he and his agent have confirmed that it's not exactly the full max they've asked for.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 36,746
- Reaction score
- 16,496
Have you heard them make this statement once Amare began playing like a superstar? Most if not all of the "contract length" comments occurred prior to the trading deadline or shortly after.
Following the deadline, Amare played like he was one of the top 5 players in the game and I suspect both his expectations and his demands rose considerably. We can only hope that the damage he did to his reputation throughout this postseason brings him down to earth but I wouldn't bet on it.
Steve
I really hope that is still the case. I mean, you need guys to take a little less sometimes to give your team some flexibility. I wish it happened more in the NBA. In the NFL you hear guys doing it all the time or even restructuring. The rules in the NBA are completely different though.
How many stars in the NBA are taking less to give their teams flexibility (a la MJ)? Yes, MJ was an endorsement god but he still could have commanded much more from the Bulls. He finally got his huge contract with the last contract with the Bulls.
Nowadays, I am not sure if it is just pure greed, a stature statement ("I am a max guy") or what. It just doesn't happen.
Bufalay
ASFN Lifer
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2006
- Posts
- 4,679
- Reaction score
- 786
Why should they?
MJ got locked into a long contract(think it was 12 years) early on that became very cheap once salaries went through the roof. Once that contract expired he signed 1 year deals worth 30mil a pop, so not sure how he was looking to help the team out with flexibility.
For the same reason MJ did.....to help the team bring in more pieces for a title.
Sunburn
ASFN Lifer
Did you completely overlook the previous comments refuting your MJ post?
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,297
- Reaction score
- 68,271
Daren, I think you're mistaken here. MJ signed an 8 year, 25 million dollar deal in what was the largest contract in NBA history... and quickly became an INCREDIBLY cheap deal. He didn't do it at the time to give the team a break, he did it at the time to make history.
Duncan on the other hand gave up 3 million bucks per year on his last contract. That's a better example of this... and probably the only one I can think of.
cly2tw
Registered User
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2002
- Posts
- 5,832
- Reaction score
- 0
Well, if it's 110mil for 6 years, it'd looks like Duncan kind of deal. I believe after all past histories of shopping Amare around, Amare stays for the same money if he considers the team and his own professional outlook here better than anywhere else. And I doubt a little more money would affect his decision either way. So, it's quite conceivable that Suns would tell him what they would be able and wish to do after signing him to build the team around him towards a contender. If he buys into it, he will likely make financial concessions a la Duncan to make it happen.
That's right. When that deal was up he got like 63 million over a couple seasons right to make up for his salary being lower then other players correct? It was Jerry's way of making up for it?
OK, maybe it isn't MJ who did it then. I remember some player restructuring his contract and taking less so the organization could sign it's second star. I don't recall who it was now.
Last edited:
Bufalay
ASFN Lifer
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2006
- Posts
- 4,679
- Reaction score
- 786
Why is having a title preferable to having money?
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 36,746
- Reaction score
- 16,496
That's not really ever the question. There is economic value in having a title in addition to personal satisfaction. At this level of play, a real superstar would be choosing between having a really incredible amount of money and a title or an even more incredible amount of money and no title. I've yet to see any of them in a position where they truly had to decide if money were preferable to having a title.
Steve
You are probably right but the Suns do have a history of going out and getting some "name" players (Chambers, Kidd, Barkley, Nash etc.). I would say you add any star to play along side Amare you have a chance provided you have a well rounded squad.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,297
- Reaction score
- 68,271
that history is immaterial IMO. The Suns used to be one of the crown jewels of the league not because of the location but because of who ran them. Colangelo was/is one of the most respected people in all of basketball, a man willing to do whatever it took to win, both in the NBA and for the Olympics. Sarver doesn't have near the cache to attract FAs to this team as Jerry did.
Great point. For a second, I think I forgot who owns this team. I think Sarver has tried to change the perception about him but there is alot of damage to clean up. If you get teams like Golden Freaking State trying to screw you or going back on an agreed trade etc...that doesn't bode well for your reputation.
I still think their are trades that can be made though that could have a huge impact.
