Selling Phoenix

I understand that the NBA is a business and that in the business world, business is business, but what's happening to the Phoenix Suns is pretty maddening. The Suns are giving away their first round draft picks in 2008 and 2010 as a sweetener to get the Seattle Supersonics to take Kurt Thomas -- a legitimate rotation player -- off their hands in exchange for nothing. The draft-related cost cutting thus far hasn't been so bad, but even though Thomas is hardly the league's best player, it's very difficult to see how to square ditching the guy you use to guard Tim Duncan (or Yao Ming!) with a good-faith effort to win a championship.

Comments

TAPPED (The American Prospect) blog is a cowardly excuse for a blog. Those twats have apparantly banned my comments because they can't disprove them. If anyone here values freedom of expression, post comments on TAPPED and tell them what twats they are for banning someone they can't disprove. I have heard the "blog is like someone's house" analogy in that you can ban anyone you want as you can tell anyone in your house to leave, but there is a difference between banning someone for being a dick and banning someone for consistently saying things that they don't want to hear yet can't disprove because they're the facts, like them or not. I've said the truth about 9/11 being a false flag operation many times on many blogs and have yet to be banned by anyone but TAPPED. I know a lot of people like to pretend that 9/11 happened the way the official myth has it, but nevertheless they haven't banned me. And a big blog like TAPPED? That even has its own magazine in print? Utterly gutless. Those cowards are either willingly or unknowingly part of the cover-up, helping out the mass murderers who have the blood of 3,000 Americans on their hands. No wonder their blog's motto is "Liberal Intelligence". They must be the liberal wing of the intelligence community. They're accessories-after-the-fact to mass murder. Cowardly pieces of shit who ban people instead of trying to debate because they can't defend the indefensible. To hell with TAPPED.

Posted by Realist | July 21, 2007 4:27 PM

it's very difficult to see how to square ditching the guy you use to guard Tim Duncan (or Yao Ming!) with a good-faith effort to win a championship.

"Good faith" doesn't mean "ignore all other constraints." Phoenix is already above the luxury tax limit. The luxury tax is so punishing because it's supposed to work, even for teams competing for a championship. (Otherwise what would be the point?)

Phoenix is still loaded with talent.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | July 21, 2007 4:27 PM

No, realist, tell us how you really feel!

Posted by max | July 21, 2007 4:40 PM

Wow - the Sonics are set to be a powerhouse in about 5 years.

Posted by sherifffruitfly | July 21, 2007 4:45 PM

this trade will look good (or at least not so awful) if boris diaw responds positively to his now-elevated status, reverting to the player he was two years ago when stat and thomas were out. i'm not so worried about the draft picks since the 6-7 man core of this team is contracted for the next several years. so it will be difficult for any low first round pick to make a significant impact on this team. plus, they do still have atlanta's unconditional '08 first-rounder (likely a high lottery pick). they also got a trade exception from seattle which gives them some flexibility trade-wise.

Posted by neil | July 21, 2007 4:50 PM

Realist, I think you're under the mistaken impression this is a political blog and not an NBA blog.

I understand Phoenix needs to control spending, but they seem to be doing a very poor job of it. They gave away a first this year to Portland to get rid of James Jones salary, and future firsts to Seattle for them to take Thomas. Two points:

1) Draft picks, especially first rounders, make for inexpensive depth. In a few years Phoenix is going to have to fill out their roster with much more expensive free agents.

2) Jones has only two years left on his contract... Kurt Thomas has ONE YEAR left!

That's what is so insane about this. They've given away 3 first round picks to save money for basically this year.

Posted by Matthew C | July 21, 2007 5:19 PM

The Sonics held them up. You shouldn't have to give up draft picks as a sweetener when you're giving up a serviceable player for nothing. Draft picks are cheap, and they could always give them away later for expiring contracts if they had to. Do they expect to still have tax problems in 2010? They'd better not.

Basically everyone knows what Phoenix is trying to do so they're getting hosed even worse than they should.

Posted by Antid Oto | July 21, 2007 6:08 PM

Kurt Thomas is directly behind Al Qaeda's attempts to fly an Airbus 380 into the Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant. This is the largest nuclear wessel in the country and it sits just 30 miles outside of Phoenix. He must be stopped.

Posted by Surrealist | July 21, 2007 6:11 PM

Nash drops off the books after '10. They'll have Marion's slot after '09. Their picks are going to be in the range of 25-29; that's basically a second round pick. I don't have a problem with what they did.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | July 21, 2007 6:41 PM

They said they're going to go after a free agent big man, but there's not too many left out there.

Maybe PJ Brown if he doesn't retire, or maybe Ronny Turiaf.

Scot Pollard is out there I think, but he hasn't done too much since he was in Sacramento.

It looks like slim pickings right now.

Getting rid of their draft picks isn't the worst sin, but it's obvious that getting rid of Kurt Thomas was done to get under the cap. Thomas was a guy who could consistently hit 15 foot jumpers and he was their best low post defender.

So while the lost draft picks may hurt them down the road, losing Thomas is likely to hurt them next year, and therefore hurt their chances of winning the title, which is maddening.

If they somehow come up with a equal replacement I'll be pleasantly surprised.

Posted by Jay J | July 21, 2007 7:10 PM

Ah, another opportunity to note how much i hate the salary cap and how little with basketball it has to do. i like trades made for basketball reasons, not for salary cap management reasons, and i like great teams, not the best team you can assesmble with a combination of luck and intelligence inside the salary cap rules.

Posted by howard | July 21, 2007 8:15 PM

I assume those picks are lottery protected?

Posted by Rich | July 21, 2007 9:30 PM

No, these picks are not lottery protected and the one in 2010 will be a lottery pick because Sarver is selling off the team. Marion will be next in 2008, Nash will go in 2009 because of his bad back and Phoenix will be a bottom dweller. That is what happens when you have a money grubbing banker for a owner.

Posted by PissedOffSunsFan | July 21, 2007 9:57 PM

"Ah, another opportunity to note how much i hate the salary cap"

Nah, it serves its purpose. Utah & Denver & Houston will be more interesting & exciting because of this. The West became more competitive.
Sad for Phoenix fans, but I do not want to return to the era where a Chicago White Sox fan born in 1910 never had a hope for his adult life.

(Okay, okay, 1959 and after mid-60s. Once in fifty years)

Posted by bob mcmanus | July 21, 2007 10:01 PM

This is like a Petey troll... In any case, I don't have a huge problem with giving away Kurt Thomas, who is still useful, but I don't mind giving him away for tax reasons. What I have a problem with is giving away all the picks, as that is just a dumb way to manage the cap - rookie contracts are cheap. They ought to give away some of their higher priced guys and keep Rudy Fernandez and Nate Robinson and Rajon Rondo and Segio Rodriguez. Frankly, they shouldn't have paid Diaw as much as they did, and obviously Banks. I know Petey is on the "Marion is the problem", but I don't think that's right - Diaw and Banks are the problem, not Marion. They'd be a much better team with a bunch of low priced guys on ther rookie contracts instead of Diaw and Banks.

Posted by Al | July 21, 2007 10:25 PM

To repeat myself from other threads, the crucial point to remember here is that isn't a case of giving away two first round picks for nothing.

Over the past 14 months, the Suns have given away six first round picks for nothing. Six!

------

"Frankly, they shouldn't have paid Diaw as much as they did, and obviously Banks. I know Petey is on the "Marion is the problem", but I don't think that's right - Diaw and Banks are the problem, not Marion. They'd be a much better team with a bunch of low priced guys on ther rookie contracts instead of Diaw and Banks."

A perfectly fair point. Given where they were sitting last summer, they had to get rid of some large contracts, (which they chose not to do), and ditching Diaw and Banks instead of trading Marion for Chandler certainly would have had similar positive tax threshold effects.

Posted by Petey | July 21, 2007 10:43 PM

" they also got a trade exception from seattle which gives them some flexibility trade-wise."

The chances of them using that trade exception to add salary are less than zero...

Posted by Petey | July 21, 2007 10:49 PM

i think they'll be more willing to add salary mid-season if they see that is what it'll take to get past the texas teams. how 'bout marcus banks and the atlanta pick for a tyson chandler or a samuel dalembert using the trade exception? that would put them way over for another full year, but after that marion's salary would be gone and sarver would have a value-added championship franchise ..

Posted by neil | July 22, 2007 12:16 AM

Fuck the Oklahoma Supersonics. At least the Storm were out at the Bite of Seattle today, spreading cheer to little girls and lesbians. They're the only team that matters. The Sonics are dead to me.

Posted by MikeJ | July 22, 2007 6:34 AM

Isn't Steve Kerr now the GM of Phoenix? It's amazing you can go from calling games straight into the President, GM position of one of the best teams in the league. Stevie and I go way back -- we went to CAC together back in the day, before his father was assassinated -- but he may be in over his head right now.

Posted by bjk | July 22, 2007 6:45 AM

"Stevie and I go way back ... but he may be in over his head right now."

The problems are not Kerr's doing. The crucial bad decisions were made last summer when D'Antoni was acting as GM.

At this point, Kerr is stuck with triage duties of cleaning up the bleeding mess he inherited. Giving away picks to get someone to take Thomas' contract is probably his correct move.

------

The blame goes to Sarver not for being a penny-pincher - he's spending more than all but a handful of owners - but for being unwilling to bring Bryan Colangelo back as GM.

The refusal to bring back Colangelo was inexplicable. The supposed reason is because Sarver didn't like how much deserved credit Colangelo was getting for the amazingly good job he'd been doing. Sarver then, instead of hiring a proper GM, put D'Antoni in change. And D'Antoni proceeded to promptly to screw the franchise up royally in a very short period of time.

Posted by Petey | July 22, 2007 7:57 AM

Anybody who says, "oh, they're only low-first-round picks" is nuts. First, who knows where the Suns will be in 2010? Their pick will probably be in the low 1st round, but it's not inconceivable that it could be a lottery pick. Say Nash is a dottering old man by then and Amare has another bad injury. Giving away that pick will look mighty stupid.

Second, when you're talking about SIX low-first-round picks, you're talking about real value. Odds are pretty good that one out of those six is going to become an excellent player. A couple others might be productive role players.

Posted by too many steves | July 22, 2007 11:07 AM

First, who knows where the Suns will be in 2010? Their pick will probably be in the low 1st round, but it's not inconceivable that it could be a lottery pick.

This was Jerry Krause's reasoning when he refused to ever trade picks for players that would have helped the Bulls. You estimate the position you'll have and factor in the risk that the pick will be more valuable. I'd be astonished if the Suns didn't do just that.

Odds are pretty good that one out of those six is going to become an excellent player.

Someone actually looked at this, but I can't find the article. My recollection is that the likelihood that you find a good player after the lottery is statistically pretty small, and drops off the table somewhere near the end of the first round.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | July 22, 2007 11:22 AM

"This was Jerry Krause's reasoning when he refused to ever trade picks for players that would have helped the Bulls."

Yes, but the Suns aren't trading picks for players. They're trading picks for cash, or for nothing. Since you have to fill the roster somehow, and guys on their rookie contracts are very cheap, this is stupid even as a cost-saving move.

Posted by too many steves | July 22, 2007 12:14 PM

guys on their rookie contracts are very cheap

Arguably true for players drafted near the beginning of the draft. Not so true for people drafted near the end. The thirtieth pick in the draft gets a contract guaranteed for two years, with an initial year value of $$718K (2005-2006 figures). For roughly the same price (about $719K), you can get a league minimum player with two years of experience, whose contract does not (AFAIK) have to have at least two guaranteed years.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | July 22, 2007 1:15 PM