Suns sign Tyus Jones

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
35,737
Reaction score
14,449
Location
Arizona
The numbers I see are different. In April he averaged 23/5/4 on 46% FG. In March he averaged better scoring numbers 26 ppg on 53% FG but had more turnovers than assists for the entire month. The playoff numbers looked good on paper but did anyone think he made a superstar impact? When KD is in a perfect situation (Warriors and Olympics) he’s a top-5 player all time. When he’s the underdog or facing adversity, far from it. Maybe the combination of Coach Bud and a legitimate PG get him closer to that ideal situation where he thrives.
Sorry, I might have been looking at the wrong ones. His numbers were: 26.9 points in the playoffs, 41.7% from 3, 55.2% from 2, 6.5 rebounds, and scored 25+ points in 3 of 4 games (against Timberwolves). Again...you are not likely going to get anything close to those numbers out of any asset we gave up.

 
Last edited:

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
16,646
Reaction score
11,749
Location
Tempe, AZ
Sorry, I might have been looking at the wrong ones. His numbers were: 26.9 points in the playoffs, 41.7% from 3, 55.2% from 2, 6.5 rebounds, and scored 25+ points in 3 of 4 games (against Timberwolves). Again...you are not likely going to get anything close to those numbers out of any asset we gave up.


We got more than that from what we gave up, Mikal, Cam, Jae, and picks. For the $50+ million that KD receives, we can get more production. KD isn't someone who can carry a team to a title, especially at this point in his career. He's not a 1A or 1B at this point. He's empty stats. He has a losing playoff record over the last 3 years, 6-13 in that time. That isn't worth an extension.

Mikal averaged 19.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 3.6 apg.
Cam averaged 13.4 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 2.4 apg.
Jae averaged 6.2 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 1.3 apg.

Combined that's 39.2 ppg, 12.0 rpg, and 7.3 apg

That's better than KD and roughly $15 million less. Thats before we talk draft picks. If KD was as valuable as you and some others claim then we should be selling.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
35,737
Reaction score
14,449
Location
Arizona
We got more than that from what we gave up, Mikal, Cam, Jae, and picks. For the $50+ million that KD receives, we can get more production. KD isn't someone who can carry a team to a title, especially at this point in his career. He's not a 1A or 1B at this point. He's empty stats. He has a losing playoff record over the last 3 years, 6-13 in that time. That isn't worth an extension.

Mikal averaged 19.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 3.6 apg.
Cam averaged 13.4 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 2.4 apg.
Jae averaged 6.2 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 1.3 apg.

Combined that's 39.2 ppg, 12.0 rpg, and 7.3 apg

That's better than KD and roughly $15 million less. Thats before we talk draft picks. If KD was as valuable as you and some others claim then we should be selling.
Combined? That’s the most useless argument ever. None of those guys are top 10 let alone top 5 players and you just can’t aggregate a bunch of players and say it equals. Playing time, combos, usage and a host of other factors make that a ridiculous argument.

Using your logic no teams need Supersrars to get it done. Just trade said stars for multiple players that equal the output and title city.
 

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
16,646
Reaction score
11,749
Location
Tempe, AZ
Combined? That’s the most useless argument ever. None of those guys are top 10 let alone top 5 players and you just can’t aggregate a bunch of players and say it equals. Playing time, combos, usage and a host of other factors make that a ridiculous argument.

Using your logic no teams need Supersrars to get it done. Just trade said stars for multiple players that equal the output and title city.

Now it's useless but just a little while ago you said...

Sorry, I might have been looking at the wrong ones. His numbers were: 26.9 points in the playoffs, 41.7% from 3, 55.2% from 2, 6.5 rebounds, and scored 25+ points in 3 of 4 games (against Timberwolves). Again...you are not likely going to get anything close to those numbers out of any asset we gave up.


So we could have received more from the assets we gave up but chose to consolidate and turn 3 into 1 who produces more than any 1 currently but it wasn't 1 for 1, it was more like 8 for 1, given the 4 first round picks and 2 swaps. So now you're going back on what you said to reframe the discussion.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
20,068
Reaction score
11,070
Sorry, I might have been looking at the wrong ones. His numbers were: 26.9 points in the playoffs, 41.7% from 3, 55.2% from 2, 6.5 rebounds, and scored 25+ points in 3 of 4 games (against Timberwolves). Again...you are not likely going to get anything close to those numbers out of any asset we gave up.


This is like thinking that swapping 1 dime for 25 nickles is a savvy transaction.

We gave up one of the largest hauls ever paid in league history for Durant, the entire logic around paying such a price was "WIN NOW!!!"... him putting up numbers on a non-contending team means absolutely nothing. This was a "win or bust" move, his personal stats are utterly meaningless... we WIN or we BUST with this trade.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
62,306
Reaction score
55,591
Location
SoCal
We got more than that from what we gave up, Mikal, Cam, Jae, and picks. For the $50+ million that KD receives, we can get more production. KD isn't someone who can carry a team to a title, especially at this point in his career. He's not a 1A or 1B at this point. He's empty stats. He has a losing playoff record over the last 3 years, 6-13 in that time. That isn't worth an extension.

Mikal averaged 19.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 3.6 apg.
Cam averaged 13.4 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 2.4 apg.
Jae averaged 6.2 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 1.3 apg.

Combined that's 39.2 ppg, 12.0 rpg, and 7.3 apg

That's better than KD and roughly $15 million less. Thats before we talk draft picks. If KD was as valuable as you and some others claim then we should be selling.
This is going to sound offensive, but it’s not meant to be. From a pure logic perspective this has to be one of the worst arguments I’ve ever seen on a sports board in any sport, well, ever.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
62,306
Reaction score
55,591
Location
SoCal
Now it's useless but just a little while ago you said...



So we could have received more from the assets we gave up but chose to consolidate and turn 3 into 1 who produces more than any 1 currently but it wasn't 1 for 1, it was more like 8 for 1, given the 4 first round picks and 2 swaps. So now you're going back on what you said to reframe the discussion.
I stand corrected. Doubling down in that argument is maybe a worse position. There are five slots and 48 minutes. If you count all of those guys stats you have to count the equal number of stats from the equal minutes of the guys around kd. Being able to get those stats from single individual in only his minutes is what makes him more valuable than a pupu platter of guys you can aggregate fo get his stats. By your logic you could take 26 guys who average 1.1pts/game and get the same value as kd. Does that help illustrate how illogical your argument is?
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
62,306
Reaction score
55,591
Location
SoCal
Now it's useless but just a little while ago you said...



So we could have received more from the assets we gave up but chose to consolidate and turn 3 into 1 who produces more than any 1 currently but it wasn't 1 for 1, it was more like 8 for 1, given the 4 first round picks and 2 swaps. So now you're going back on what you said to reframe the discussion.
You do know the definition of “swap,” right? At a minimum a swap requires getting something back. So it would be 8 for 3 in your argument. With the best piece (based on historical percentages) most likely in the 3 grouping.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
62,306
Reaction score
55,591
Location
SoCal
This is like thinking that swapping 1 dime for 25 nickles is a savvy transaction.

We gave up one of the largest hauls ever paid in league history for Durant, the entire logic around paying such a price was "WIN NOW!!!"... him putting up numbers on a non-contending team means absolutely nothing. This was a "win or bust" move, his personal stats are utterly meaningless... we WIN or we BUST with this trade.
No, this is more like giving up a quarter, a dime, four pieces that could be anything from a dollar to worthless (with a much greater likelihood of worthless or pennies), and two pieces that could be a dollar to worthless (with a much much greater likelihood of worthless) for a dollar and two pieces that could be a dollar to worthless (with a much much much higher likelihood of worthlessness.

Again, it looks like it won’t be a deal that pushed us over the top today. But based purely on return realized the suns are presently ahead in the deal. Kd was better for the suns than the combo of bridges and cam for the nets. And now the netsbdobt even have bridges any longer, they cashed him in for more lottery tickets. You can gnash your teeth all you want for 6 years. Seems a futile thing at this point considering the deal was made. At this point I am choosing to just see how each year unfolds. And either enjoy what we have or not in the moment. Angst about what may or may not Happen in the future just seems like a bad place to out oneself emotionally.
 

GatorAZ

feed hopkins
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Posts
25,006
Reaction score
17,647
Location
The Giant Toaster
The thing about “win now” trades is you have to leave yourself enough to win now. Idc about the picks and Mikal was the centerpiece but the deal minus Cam would’ve been enough. Which other teams were we bidding against for an injured superstar that was only wanting to play here?
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
62,306
Reaction score
55,591
Location
SoCal
The thing about “win now” trades is you have to leave yourself enough to win now. Idc about the picks and Mikal was the centerpiece but the deal minus Cam would’ve been enough. Which other teams were we bidding against for an injured superstar that was only wanting to play here?
I don’t think anyone here would’ve disagreed with hoping to keep cam. But history will look back and say that cam was really just a fungible throw-in. He’s never taken a next step and averages playing 51 games/season.
 

GatorAZ

feed hopkins
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Posts
25,006
Reaction score
17,647
Location
The Giant Toaster
I don’t think anyone here would’ve disagreed with hoping to keep cam. But history will look back and say that cam was really just a fungible throw-in. He’s never taken a next step and averages playing 51 games/season.

Well he’s a 41% 3P shooter in the playoffs so that’s a lot better than the journeyman scrubs we’ve been throwing out there along side KD/Book. Plus we never had a PF so he was always playing out of position. That Denver series would’ve been a little more interesting with Cam instead of TJ Warren, Terrence Ross, Torrey Craig and Josh Okogie who went a combined 8-42 from 3.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
35,737
Reaction score
14,449
Location
Arizona
Now it's useless but just a little while ago you said...



So we could have received more from the assets we gave up but chose to consolidate and turn 3 into 1 who produces more than any 1 currently but it wasn't 1 for 1, it was more like 8 for 1, given the 4 first round picks and 2 swaps. So now you're going back on what you said to reframe the discussion.
No once again you didn’t understand what was being said. There was no reframing. You highlighted the vary words that you evidently didn't understand.

"out of any asset we gave up"

Out of means something from or from among. Meaning that you are not likley to get a draft pick that will turn into a hall of famer, Top 5 player in the NBA OUT OF ALL those assets. I never said anything about combining the collective games of all those assets. That’s silly. Ouchie got it.
 
Last edited:

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
45,850
Reaction score
16,124
Location
Round Rock, TX
Well he’s a 41% 3P shooter in the playoffs so that’s a lot better than the journeyman scrubs we’ve been throwing out there along side KD/Book. Plus we never had a PF so he was always playing out of position. That Denver series would’ve been a little more interesting with Cam instead of TJ Warren, Terrence Ross, Torrey Craig and Josh Okogie who went a combined 8-42 from 3.
Good argument, especially since the Nets are going to be a playoff team for years to come... Oh. Wait.
 

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
27,187
Reaction score
9,010
Location
L.A. area
Don’t bother Ouch. Phrazbit is on one of his catastrophising rolls where the future is hopeless… even though in a couple years we should be flush with cap space

The earliest the Suns could have significant cap space is the summer of 2027, and if the rumors of extending Durant are true, you can kiss that goodbye. There is no prospect for being "flush with cap space" until the Suns move on from both Beal and Durant.
 

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
27,187
Reaction score
9,010
Location
L.A. area
I don’t think anyone here would’ve disagreed with hoping to keep cam. But history will look back and say that cam was really just a fungible throw-in. He’s never taken a next step and averages playing 51 games/season.

I agree with that, and I agree that if you view Bridges as the centerpiece of the Durant deal, it was a reasonable gamble for the Suns to take. Where we disagree is on the value of the picks. Even if it's true that a mid lottery pick isn't all that likely to pan out, it has great trade value. The trade value (not necessarily court value) of what the Suns gave up vastly exceeds what they got back.
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
45,850
Reaction score
16,124
Location
Round Rock, TX
I agree with that, and I agree that if you view Bridges as the centerpiece of the Durant deal, it was a reasonable gamble for the Suns to take. Where we disagree is on the value of the picks. Even if it's true that a mid lottery pick isn't all that likely to pan out, it has great trade value. The trade value (not necessarily court value) of what the Suns gave up vastly exceeds what they got back.
I think that is debatable. Mid-round draft picks aren't going to net you a superstar the caliber of KD.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
20,068
Reaction score
11,070
You can gnash your teeth all you want for 6 years. Seems a futile thing at this point considering the deal was made. At this point I am choosing to just see how each year unfolds. And either enjoy what we have or not in the moment. Angst about what may or may not Happen in the future just seems like a bad place to out oneself emotionally.

I didn't fire this debate up again, I merely said the exact same thoughts I had when the trade when down. Nothing has changed, I think we're stuck on a course that we won't be able to correct, it is what it is.

And what the Nets do with those picks and assets is irrelevant to us... they could draft nothing but busts with each of them, but if those are high picks it means that we're awful and the trade was a disaster.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
20,068
Reaction score
11,070
I agree with that, and I agree that if you view Bridges as the centerpiece of the Durant deal, it was a reasonable gamble for the Suns to take. Where we disagree is on the value of the picks. Even if it's true that a mid lottery pick isn't all that likely to pan out, it has great trade value. The trade value (not necessarily court value) of what the Suns gave up vastly exceeds what they got back.

Exactly, the "opportunity cost" of the trade was astronomical.
 

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
16,646
Reaction score
11,749
Location
Tempe, AZ
This is going to sound offensive, but it’s not meant to be. From a pure logic perspective this has to be one of the worst arguments I’ve ever seen on a sports board in any sport, well, ever.

Responding to what someone else says, and their claim, is now one of the worst arguments ever? I agree. Blame the person who started it. @Covert Rain can take a bow.
I stand corrected. Doubling down in that argument is maybe a worse position. There are five slots and 48 minutes. If you count all of those guys stats you have to count the equal number of stats from the equal minutes of the guys around kd. Being able to get those stats from single individual in only his minutes is what makes him more valuable than a pupu platter of guys you can aggregate fo get his stats. By your logic you could take 26 guys who average 1.1pts/game and get the same value as kd. Does that help illustrate how illogical your argument is?

Again, read what @Covert Rain said. Funny how you are singling me out since you seem to have been in favor of the KD trade though.

I explained what they gave up. We've been playing with less than a full rotation since we traded for KD. I think most would agree with that, and considering we were fairly deep before the trade I believe it's fair to say the KD trade cost us our depth and flexibility. We've been playing catch up ever since. Hey, Ishbia took a swing though and apparently that's all that matters for some.

You do know the definition of “swap,” right? At a minimum a swap requires getting something back. So it would be 8 for 3 in your argument. With the best piece (based on historical percentages) most likely in the 3 grouping.

3 for 1, 3 players for 1 plus 4 picks with those players. 7 total now. I counted each swap as a half since they aren't full sacrifices but we get the lesser and have fewer trade opportunities. Why you added 2 to the incoming asset doesn't make sense, at all.

Again, I didn't start this. I simply responded to someone's distorted claims as to why the trade was great. It didn't make sense when I read it and they've twisted stats a few times now to try and endorse it and claim it wasn't as bad as it's been. Why? That's on them. I'm not surprised you'd play attack dog though and try and try and deflect for them since you've always been on the pro KD side of the trade. So if you think this argument is dumb, cool because we agree but do everyone a favor and focus that energy on the guy who said started it, Mr @Covert Rain
 

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
16,646
Reaction score
11,749
Location
Tempe, AZ
I didn't fire this debate up again, I merely said the exact same thoughts I had when the trade when down. Nothing has changed, I think we're stuck on a course that we won't be able to correct, it is what it is.

And what the Nets do with those picks and assets is irrelevant to us... they could draft nothing but busts with each of them, but if those are high picks it means that we're awful and the trade was a disaster.

The Nets dont even own most of the picks, they unloaded them to get their own picks back so they can properly tank. I'm sure the Nets not being a contender by 2030 will be mentioned as a positive for the Suns but they don't have the picks anymore and like you said, it doesn't matter what happens to them. The point is we don't have them to improve in any way, be it by trading them or using them.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
35,737
Reaction score
14,449
Location
Arizona
Responding to what someone else says, and their claim, is now one of the worst arguments ever? I agree. Blame the person who started it. @Covert Rain can take a bow.


Again, read what @Covert Rain said. Funny how you are singling me out since you seem to have been in favor of the KD trade though.

I explained what they gave up. We've been playing with less than a full rotation since we traded for KD. I think most would agree with that, and considering we were fairly deep before the trade I believe it's fair to say the KD trade cost us our depth and flexibility. We've been playing catch up ever since. Hey, Ishbia took a swing though and apparently that's all that matters for some.



3 for 1, 3 players for 1 plus 4 picks with those players. 7 total now. I counted each swap as a half since they aren't full sacrifices but we get the lesser and have fewer trade opportunities. Why you added 2 to the incoming asset doesn't make sense, at all.

Again, I didn't start this. I simply responded to someone's distorted claims as to why the trade was great. It didn't make sense when I read it and they've twisted stats a few times now to try and endorse it and claim it wasn't as bad as it's been. Why? That's on them. I'm not surprised you'd play attack dog though and try and try and deflect for them since you've always been on the pro KD side of the trade. So if you think this argument is dumb, cool because we agree but do everyone a favor and focus that energy on the guy who said started it, Mr @Covert Rain
You are the one that made the stupid argument and tried to justify that logic by trying to say something that nobody said….again. You don’t get to change the meaning of words just because you made such a stupid logic leap.

Nobody asked you to respond. Nobody asked you to misinterpret what was said. Nobody asked you to change the meaning of the words YOU HIGHLIGHTED. Yet somehow I started it with you?

ROFLMAO.
 
Last edited:

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
547,238
Posts
5,349,724
Members
6,303
Latest member
Sunchaser
Top