Tyler Johnson to the Suns

[elindholm]

Suns are playing chess, not checkers with this move.

Yeah, a franchise that's been the dregs of the league for the last several years doesn't get to make that claim.

 

[elindholm]

Well. I don't think there is a better authority on this subject than Larry Coon.

That might be the only time in my life that I've seen Twitter be useful. Way to go, Larry Coon!

 

[Folster]

As in the cap hit is $15.6 million.

Well. I don't think there is a better authority on this subject than Larry Coon.

Where are Slin and Sanders at?

 

[SirStefan32]

Where are Slin and Sanders at?

Slin is probably tweeting at Larry Coon calling him an idiot. Sanders will admit he is wrong- he is just not very active here so it may take him a day, but unless he just doesn't see it, he'll admit to being wrong.

 

[Chaplin]

Slin is probably tweeting at Larry Coon calling him an idiot.

To be fair, it isn't like it's easy to understand. I never agreed with Slin and Chris, but they certainly had good arguments. I'll be the first to say that I know next to nothing about salary and contract rules, so I have no problem saying I was barking up the wrong tree, but even Coon's explanation isn't exactly clear.

 

[GatorAZ]

The format of that salary cap website (at least on my phone) was ridiculous. I can’t blame anyone for getting it misconstrued.

As for the trade there’s nothing about it worth freaking out over.

 

[Folster]

To be fair, it isn't like it's easy to understand. I never agreed with Slin and Chris, but they certainly had good arguments. I'll be the first to say that I know next to nothing about salary and contract rules, so I have no problem saying I was barking up the wrong tree, but even Coon's explanation isn't exactly clear.

Even Gambo had it right.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Slin is probably tweeting at Larry Coon calling him an idiot. Sanders will admit he is wrong- he is just not very active here so it may take him a day, but unless he just doesn't see it, he'll admit to being wrong.

And I had already pretty much admitted I was wrong, only to find I was right. But my explanation was wrong.

 

[elindholm]

The question remains, if Anderson negotiated a lower guarantee for 2019-20 in order to facilitate his trade to the Suns, why? Did he have the illusion that he'd be good enough to earn playing time? Was it the weather? Did he just want out of Houston? Slinslin was right that we rarely see this kind of thing happen, and there are good reasons for that. So why did it happen this time?

 

[SirStefan32]

To be fair, it isn't like it's easy to understand. I never agreed with Slin and Chris, but they certainly had good arguments. I'll be the first to say that I know next to nothing about salary and contract rules, so I have no problem saying I was barking up the wrong tree, but even Coon's explanation isn't exactly clear.

Oh absolutely. I already admitted I had no idea earlier in the thread, and I even said what Slin was saying made logical sense, but that I have never seen it reported that way. I have no issue with someone not knowing something (I sure as hell had no idea), but it's funny that Slin was running around calling people idiots and it turned out he was wrong.

 

[SirStefan32]

The question remains, if Anderson negotiated a lower guarantee for 2019-20 in order to facilitate his trade to the Suns, why? Did he have the illusion that he'd be good enough to earn playing time? Was it the weather? Did he just want out of Houston? Slinslin was right that we rarely see this kind of thing happen, and there are good reasons for that. So why did it happen this time?

I think he thought that he would get playing time, which he did. He miscalculated how good he was. He probably thought he could actually play.

 

[JCSunsfan]

The question remains, if Anderson negotiated a lower guarantee for 2019-20 in order to facilitate his trade to the Suns, why? Did he have the illusion that he'd be good enough to earn playing time? Was it the weather? Did he just want out of Houston? Slinslin was right that we rarely see this kind of thing happen, and there are good reasons for that. So why did it happen this time?

I think he thought he would play well enough to get on for his next contract. He expected that he would lose $6 million in his final year, but then sign on with some other team for 4/40 or so. He could double dip for one year.

 

[ColdPickleNachos]

I think you all underrate Tyler Johnson. Check out how fast he looks in this highlight video:

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[JCSunsfan]

He is a 2, but can play the 1. He is the best pg we have seen on this team in some time.

Odd thing. He is a pretty good shot blocker for his size.

 

[slinslin]

Slin is probably tweeting at Larry Coon calling him an idiot. Sanders will admit he is wrong- he is just not very active here so it may take him a day, but unless he just doesn't see it, he'll admit to being wrong.

I tweeted Coons earlier actually to clarify the confusion between Q59 and Q60 and he answered my question first.

Apparently agreeing to reduce the guaranteed money on his final deal does not count as „re-negotiation“ of his contract so that Q59 does not apply which otherwise states that renegotiating amounting in a „pay cut“ to increase salary capspace is not possible.

Imo Coons needs to cleanup his cbafaq there, that is some important clarification missing there.

Seems like the Suns simply decided they had no intention to waive or stretch Anderson anyway which also would have meant to decline rights to Oubre and thus decided that Tyler Johnson is the better expiring contract to have next year and 2M smaller.

 

[Hoop Head]

I tweeted Coons earlier actually to clarify the confusion between Q59 and Q60 and he answered my question first.

Apparently agreeing to reduce the guaranteed money on his final deal does not count as „re-negotiation“ of his contract so that Q59 does not apply which otherwise states that renegotiating amounting in a „pay cut“ to increase salary capspace is not possible.

Imo Coons needs to cleanup his cbafaq there, that is some important clarification missing there.

Seems like the Suns simply decided they had no intention to waive or stretch Anderson anyway which also would have meant to decline rights to Oubre and thus decided that Tyler Johnson is the better expiring contract to have next year and 2M smaller.

So he answered your question and you still decided to push the idea his cap hit was $21 million? Unless you didn't get an answer before claiming everyone was an idiot for not agreeing with you that his cap hit was $21 million. So you based the idea that everyone was an idiot on how you interpreted 2 sentences in #59 and ignoring everything else and mainly #60, which is titled "In what other ways can an existing contract be modified?"

It was pointed out to you multiple times that #60 explained how the contract was reworked but you kept ignoring that and now you think Larry Coon should rewrite the FAQ because YOU misunderstood it but virtually everyone who tried telling you that you were wrong didn't? Ok.

There isn't important information missing, you were too happy to call people names and act like you were the smartest Suns fan in existence while openly saying multiple posters here, and elsewhere, were idiots and that you were right and they were wrong. In addition to claiming posters were idiots and placing yourself on a pedestal, you also threw various insults at a number of reporters that were quoted by those who tried telling you that Anderson's cap hit was around $16 million and not the $21 million that you claimed.

Do you understand that even if Larry Coon did rewrite the FAQ that you still would have been incorrect? I hope you learned not to act so smug and indignant when you are conversing with other fans but from your response I don't think you learned anything.

 

[taz02]

Aside from cap considerations, will TJ2 cost sarver and co. less than Anderson?

 

[Hoop Head]

Aside from cap considerations, will TJ2 cost sarver and co. less than Anderson?

I think he would but with Wayne Ellington being added to it, I believe that would even things out as far as what it would actually cost Sarver out of pocket.

I believe the reason you are asking is to determine if this was a cost cutting move on Sarver's part and I doubt that is the case in this instance, if it is then the savings would not be very much, maybe $1 million or so but that would mainly come from buying out Ellington so it wouldn't be guaranteed to save Sarver. Ellington could always say no to the buyout like Dudley and then Sarver would save nothing substantial. There might be a slight difference if that happened but then we're talking less than 50k, which may be a nice chunk for us but is nothing for NBA owners and most players.

 

[taz02]

Thanks, that's exactly what I was wondering.

 

[slinslin]

So he answered your question and you still decided to push the idea his cap hit was $21 million? Unless you didn't get an answer before claiming everyone was an idiot for not agreeing with you that his cap hit was $21 million. So you based the idea that everyone was an idiot on how you interpreted 2 sentences in #59 and ignoring everything else and mainly #60, which is titled "In what other ways can an existing contract be modified?"

He answered 6 hours after I asked him to clarify how Q59 and Q60 interact.

Nowhere does he state that this modification can be done in order to achieve a "pay cut" which contradicts Q59. I am not going to change my opinion that his answers are not clear in that regard at all.

How can you possibly know that adjusting the guaranteed money on a players deal is not considered re-negotiation of that contract. That is un-intuitive.

 

[Phrazbit]

I don't think this trade is about Sarver saving money.

I do think we're getting a somewhat serviceable player for a player that was completely useless.

However, the big (and only obvious) benefactor in this deal is Miami and their tax situation. Seeing as Jones has already done a favor to an old teammate and now he seems to be helping out a former team... it's concerning.

Back in high school a friend of a friend became an assistant manager at a Wendy's. Worked out well for the friend and his friends, we got free sodas and occasionally free burgers too... probably didn't work out so hot for Wendy's. It's a Filiberto's now.

 

[taz02]

Whats concerning is that with the assets at our disposal we aren't able to make a trade that has any real impact, though the day isn't over.

At least if nothing else, we can all get on board with tankathon 2.0, or is it 3.0.

 

[Chaplin]

I don't think this trade is about Sarver saving money.

I do think we're getting a somewhat serviceable player for a player that was completely useless.

However, the big (and only obvious) benefactor in this deal is Miami and their tax situation. Seeing as Jones has already done a favor to an old teammate and now he seems to be helping out a former team... it's concerning.

Back in high school a friend of a friend became an assistant manager at a Wendy's. Worked out well for the friend and his friends, we got free sodas and occasionally free burgers too... probably didn't work out so hot for Wendy's. It's a Filiberto's now.

If this was the only possible way to get rid of Anderson, does it matter that the trade was with Miami?

 

[SirStefan32]

Yeah, I don't really care if it helped Miami. As long as it's a good move for Phoenix, I could not possibly care less if it helps the other team too. As the matter of fact, typically a trade should help both teams involved.

 

[slinslin]

the logical explanation is that the Suns had

a) no intention of stretching or waiving Anderson
b) want to re-sign Oubre who has a caphold of 10M$

This seems likely since re-signing Oubre takes them out of the FA market anyway even if they did stretch Anderson.

So if you do not stretch Anderson then Tyler Johnson actually does give you 2M$ more room while being a more servicable player.

If you think about it like that, buying out Anderson would only have gained the Suns 4M$ caproom while not having the player. Is Tyler Johnson worth a 4M$ contract? Probably yes.