The Ayton Plan

[ASUCHRIS]

I believe that has to do with Ayton's camp demanding no less than the 5 year max. James Jones said if it was X amount of money annually then they'd be done because they wanted to do 3 or 4 years but Ayton's camp wasn't receptive to anything short of 5 years at max money. No one else got 5 years, why should they care if Ayton did?

Jones straight up says they'll do 4 years but they absolutely won't do 5 years max.

". So if it’s a four-year max deal, it could be done, right? It could be done if you entertain it or consider it."

It's just so bizzare, especially considering the new TV deal would make a 5th year less of hit. Why in the hell would you be ok with 4 years max and not 5? That's the big mystery.

 

[Yuma]

It could be. Jones seems adamant that the hold up was years and not annual pay. They would have gone for 3 or 4 years but 5 wasn't what they wanted and Ayton's team refused to discuss less than 5.

I find this odd. I know most of the contracts were based around the number of years Chris Paul may be here. However, why wouldn't you want to keep Ayton and Booker if you were rebuilding past that point? I would think the Suns would want more years?

 

[Hoop Head]

I think Sarver, James Jones, or possibly both, don't believe Ayton is a max player without Chris Paul and don't want to be on the hook for a max deal beyond that point. Right or wrong, that makes the most sense as far as why limit him to 3-4 years.

I kinda can't blame them. I don't want to think about the Suns beyond Chris Paul very much myself. I want Booker here but Booker has proven himself as a centerpiece or no less than a fantastic sidekick that another star wants to play with. Is Ayton there? No. There's no way Chris Paul wants to come to Phoenix without Booker already here. Put Ayton in Booker's shoes and Paul ends up in Philly or Milwaukee instead.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

MSN

www.msn.com

used?

I’m dumber for having read that.

 

[SirStefan32]

The Athletic has a great article where they talk to James Jones about this.

Suns GM James Jones on Deandre Ayton contract extension talks: ‘We didn’t have real negotiations’

An exclusive interview with Suns GM James Jones, who explains the reason a deal could not be reached with Deandre Ayton.

theathletic.com

It clears up some, makes some things a bit murkier but it's a good read. I believe JJ on this. He has no reason to lie and he makes it clear that Ayton's team came in wanting the full on 5 year max and would settle for nothing else. He even mentions the 3 or 4 year max but says they weren't receptive to anything but 5 years, full max.

It also highlights how Booker got the full on rookie max and if Ayton did also then until those deals are done they can not acquire anyone else on a rookie max. Which is what stopped the Celtics from being able to bid on Anthony Davis when he was dealt. They had Jayson Tatum and Kyrie Irving already and needed to either trade one or wait until the offseason until Kyrie opted out so they could sign him to a new deal, one that wasn't a designated rookie max extension, because league rules limit a team to only being allowed 2 players to be on a team with designated rookie max extensions at one time, whether its year 1 or year 5 of those.

Oh now that is interesting indeed!

 

[Hoop Head]

Oh now that is interesting indeed!

I can't recommend it enough. Maybe it's damage control but I trust James Jones and he really makes it all make sense.

 

[SirStefan32]

I can't recommend it enough it. Maybe it's damage control but I trust James Jones and he really makes it all make sense.

Yeah, I feel a lot better about this because of Jones. While I think it's silly how deranged people are about Sarver, I don't really trust him. Jones, on the other hand... I think I trust him. If he is the one who made the call to not give him the max, I am OK with that. Keeping that second max slot open is intriguing. I have no nidea what's going on, but there is more to this than we know.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I think Sarver, James Jones, or possibly both, don't believe Ayton is a max player without Chris Paul and don't want to be on the hook for a max deal beyond that point. Right or wrong, that makes the most sense as far as why limit him to 3-4 years.

I kinda can't blame them. I don't want to think about the Suns beyond Chris Paul very much myself. I want Booker here but Booker has proven himself as a centerpiece or no less than a fantastic sidekick that another star wants to play with. Is Ayton there? No. There's no way Chris Paul wants to come to Phoenix without Booker already here. Put Ayton in Booker's shoes and Paul ends up in Philly or Milwaukee instead.

Yeah, I think that's true. I suspect they're looking around the league at defensive centers that were turned into max players by CP and other strong PG's and realized that almost all of them look like huge overpayments the moment they are separated from an elite point guard.

But I think there's a difference though with DA. He has been a disappointment offensively (except the postseason) but unlike so many other defensive centers, you can see he has real (underdeveloped) scoring potential.

 

[Yuma]

So the flip side, suppose the Suns didn't make the Finals, but DA was going 25 points 15 rebounds all season, I bet he gets paid. Just saying. There is some truth about "IF" he put up numbers he would have got paid. It was on Ayton to get to that level so he would have got paid.

 

[Hoop Head]

So the flip side, suppose the Suns didn't make the Finals, but DA was going 25 points 15 rebounds all season, I bet he gets paid. Just saying. There is some truth about "IF" he put up numbers he would have got paid. It was on Ayton to get to that level so he would have got paid.

That's an interesting point. I wouldn't pay him because then I'd be asking how to make this team a title contender and the answer would likely be add a defensive big who can lock down the paint. It's tough but look at how Paul was an upgrade from Rubio for an example of that. Rubio was worth the money we paid him but Paul was worth twice what Rubio was because of his impact. Is Ayton really the absolute best Center we can add? I'm not sure. Like I've said before I think there are centers making less than max money who could produce what Ayton does and we see similar results.

 

[Proximo]

So the only guy I think is close to being able to get a max is Cam Johnson if he balls all out this season. I know that's a big IF. However, if this is a concern, it has to be Cam Johnson as the guy who they would be leaving this option open for.

No. They are thinking if somehow they make a trade. Really I think they are just using that as an excuse.

Cam Johnson as much as I love the guy does not have max level skill.

 

[Proximo]

So the flip side, suppose the Suns didn't make the Finals, but DA was going 25 points 15 rebounds all season, I bet he gets paid. Just saying. There is some truth about "IF" he put up numbers he would have got paid. It was on Ayton to get to that level so he would have got paid.

He's simply not capable of that unless he is shooting 40% from the field.

The idea the Suns were freezing him out is just dumb. If he had the ability to play even remotely like an Embid, Jokic, or Giannis the Suns would be feeding him the ball like crazy.

The Suns want to win, they optimized the team by NOT making him a primary scoring option.

 

[Mainstreet]

That is ridiculous.

Every time the suns have tried to run offense through Ayton it does not work. He has no low post moves, all he ends up doing is pulling up for a 15 ft jumper he makes 35% of the time. And that's if he can catch the inbound pass without turning it over.

I have been waiting for Ayton to show something offensively beyond the lob and putback game, but he just is not efficent at anything else.

I am worried he may start taking a bunch of bad shots now to try and prove he is worthy of a max deal. To me this is the worst case scenerio of this non extension.

I'm definitely expecting more threes and mid-range shots from Ayton this season.

As long as he makes himself available inside this may not be a bad thing because I think he is capable of hitting these shots.

 

[Hoop Head]

No. They are thinking if somehow they make a trade. Really I think they are just using that as an excuse.

Cam Johnson as much as I love the guy does not have max level skill.

Maybe its an excuse but if the plan is to try and replace Paul with a DeAaron Fox or Ja Morant type of young player then we'd be removing ourselves from the equation entirely by giving Ayton the max.

Another thing it limits is a teams ability to take Ayton in a trade also. If they already have 2 designated max deals then they can't trade for Ayton if he were on a Designated max. So it does limit options in a few ways, especially when there is no debate about our need to replace Paul in 2-3 years. You don't want to go into that period handcuffed.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

I think Sarver, James Jones, or possibly both, don't believe Ayton is a max player without Chris Paul and don't want to be on the hook for a max deal beyond that point. Right or wrong, that makes the most sense as far as why limit him to 3-4 years.

I kinda can't blame them. I don't want to think about the Suns beyond Chris Paul very much myself. I want Booker here but Booker has proven himself as a centerpiece or no less than a fantastic sidekick that another star wants to play with. Is Ayton there? No. There's no way Chris Paul wants to come to Phoenix without Booker already here. Put Ayton in Booker's shoes and Paul ends up in Philly or Milwaukee instead.

It's just incredible that people are willing to accept the "I'll go 4 no problem, but absolutely no go on 5 years" for a 23 year old big man who just took us to the finals. If for whatever reason he flames out, the exposure is one more year, but that is easily offset by the new TV deal. Even if Ayton didn't improve at all (which seems unlikely), his floor is so high that the risk is low.

If he thrives and leaves, there will be plenty of explaining to do.

 

[Finito]

That's an interesting point. I wouldn't pay him because then I'd be asking how to make this team a title contender and the answer would likely be add a defensive big who can lock down the paint. It's tough but look at how Paul was an upgrade from Rubio for an example of that. Rubio was worth the money we paid him but Paul was worth twice what Rubio was because of his impact. Is Ayton really the absolute best Center we can add? I'm not sure. Like I've said before I think there are centers making less than max money who could produce what Ayton does and we see similar results.

Dude. Your saying you wouldn’t pay him the max because of how he plays now and now you just said if he got 25/15 you wouldn’t pay him the max with that either because we weren’t winning.

Come on

 

[AzStevenCal]

No. They are thinking if somehow they make a trade. Really I think they are just using that as an excuse.

Cam Johnson as much as I love the guy does not have max level skill.

It's possible. It doesn't seem like that would be a problem very often. But OTOH maybe they already have a target in mind that's a year or two out, perhaps a CP replacement?

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Maybe its an excuse but if the plan is to try and replace Paul with a DeAaron Fox or Ja Morant type of young player then we'd be removing ourselves from the equation entirely by giving Ayton the max.

Another thing it limits is a teams ability to take Ayton in a trade also. If they already have 2 designated max deals then they can't trade for Ayton if he were on a Designated max. So it does limit options in a few ways, especially when there is no debate about our need to replace Paul in 2-3 years. You don't want to go into that period handcuffed.

"If they have hopes of adding even more star power here — and it seems clear they do — that factor does make some sense.

Yet Ayton’s representatives say they were never told of this rationale during the process, so one can understand why it would fall on deaf ears now and be seen, in essence, as part of a public effort to quell the criticism. What’s more, the prospect of landing a player of that caliber without giving up Booker or Ayton in return is likely far-fetched."

 

[SirStefan32]

1hat people are willing to accept the "I'll go 4 no problem, but absolutely no go on 5 years" for a 23 year old big man who just took us to the finals. If for whatever reason he flames out, the exposure is one more year, but that is easily offset by the new TV deal. Even if Ayton didn't improve at all (which seems unlikely), his floor is so high that the risk is low.

If he thrives and leaves, there will be plenty of explaining to do.

Read the article with James Jones' interview. It makes perfect sense. You can only have two true max contracts (off of rookie deals). If it's not a full max (five years), you are not boxing yourself in.

 

[AzStevenCal]

That's an interesting point. I wouldn't pay him because then I'd be asking how to make this team a title contender and the answer would likely be add a defensive big who can lock down the paint. It's tough but look at how Paul was an upgrade from Rubio for an example of that. Rubio was worth the money we paid him but Paul was worth twice what Rubio was because of his impact. Is Ayton really the absolute best Center we can add? I'm not sure. Like I've said before I think there are centers making less than max money who could produce what Ayton does and we see similar results.

Maybe if he put up those numbers and we didn't make the playoffs but I think 25 and 15 would have made him a near lock for the rookie supermax.

 

[Hoop Head]

It's just incredible that people are willing to accept the "I'll go 4 no problem, but absolutely no go on 5 years" for a 23 year old big man who just took us to the finals. If for whatever reason he flames out, the exposure is one more year, but that is easily offset by the new TV deal. Even if Ayton didn't improve at all (which seems unlikely), his floor is so high that the risk is low.

If he thrives and leaves, there will be plenty of explaining to do.

It's more complex than the TV deal making up for his deal if he underperforms. It limits our ability to add a designated max player until the deals done. A team can only have 2 of those, period, and we got Booker as 1.

Using similar logic though, why wouldn't Ayton just accept the 4 year deal? He's getting the money, what's the problem? He can get so much more when the TV deals comes around and make more money in that 5th year than if he was locked in.

 

[Cheesebeef]

While the details are true that comes off as spin to me.

agreed. he didn't mention that they're still sitting on 4.5 million in cap space for the MLE, 1.5 for vet exception while also having an open roster spot with a problematic hole at PF. It's not just the non-action with Ayton that has Suns fans upset.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I think Sarver, James Jones, or possibly both, don't believe Ayton is a max player without Chris Paul and don't want to be on the hook for a max deal beyond that point. Right or wrong, that makes the most sense as far as why limit him to 3-4 years.

I kinda can't blame them. I don't want to think about the Suns beyond Chris Paul very much myself. I want Booker here but Booker has proven himself as a centerpiece or no less than a fantastic sidekick that another star wants to play with. Is Ayton there? No. There's no way Chris Paul wants to come to Phoenix without Booker already here. Put Ayton in Booker's shoes and Paul ends up in Philly or Milwaukee instead.

man, this is so ridiculously short-sighted for any professional franchise.

 

[Proximo]

Maybe its an excuse but if the plan is to try and replace Paul with a DeAaron Fox or Ja Morant type of young player then we'd be removing ourselves from the equation entirely by giving Ayton the max.

Another thing it limits is a teams ability to take Ayton in a trade also. If they already have 2 designated max deals then they can't trade for Ayton if he were on a Designated max. So it does limit options in a few ways, especially when there is no debate about our need to replace Paul in 2-3 years. You don't want to go into that period handcuffed.

I have heard Sacrameto may be willing to move Fox at some point because of Haliburton. Ja Morant is never going to be traded unless he forces it.

Would they take Paul - can't see how, because he would have to be playing really well still for them to want him, and then why would the Suns be trading him? Some kind of 3 way deal? I just don't see how there would be a situation where it would make sense for a team to choose Paul over Fox.

 

[SirStefan32]

agreed. he didn't mention that they're still sitting on 4.5 million in cap space for the MLE, 1.5 for vet exception while also having an open roster spot with a problematic hole at PF. It's not just the non-action with Ayton that has Suns fans upset.

I can't imagine that too many of us are upset by that, honestly. I think it makes sense to keep a roster spot open since the 15th man isn't gonna get much playing time. They might believe in Stix (I don't, but they might), or they may have a specific target in mind (Thad Young0type scenario.)