We need to give props to Dell

[da ThRONe]

Bro this is not 2k, you think teams want to give up their assets for a player on the last year of his deal and missing time due to a unknown knee injury? Lol
And when i meant OK, i meant in this te will be fine in making the playoffs. The weat doesn't scare me like it may too you. I see alot of playoff teams with question marks as well

PHX offered him the max. Clearly there was some value for Gordon. Also even if there was no trade to be had you let Gordon situation become the Suns problem. It seems very simple to me.

[da ThRONe]

You asked if the poster realized that Demps was the one that traded for Gordon and decided to keep him. My thing is what else was he supposed to do at the time? No one knew that Gordon would miss over a seasons worth of games in 3 years here. Personally I would have let him walk, but if Gordon would have been healthy the trade and extension probably would have looked like a great move.

Yes I did ask the poster if he realized Demps was the one that traded for Gordon and decided to keep him. The reason I did is because he mentioned Evans as "Gordon insurance" and Dell is the reason Eric is still here in the first place.

Let not act like Eric didn't have this history of injuries when we traded for him and didn't have it here before Dell matched the contract. We knew he was injury prone so the outcome is not a factor Demps wasn't aware of at the time. Therefore he has to accept the blame when a player still struggles with health issues. You can't just say well if he could have stayed healthy when that was the biggest reason you shouldn't have sign that guy to a max contract in the first place.

[da ThRONe]

People questioned what dell did but in the same situation phx just did the same

And most people are being critical of PHX right now because it makes no sense investing that kind of money and assets into the same position. Unless they plan on moving one of the 3 of Dragic/Bledsoe/Thomas signing Bledsoe to a huge deal after signing Thomas and drafting Ennis is just not smart.

[DefensiveMind]

DaThrone is right about Gordon. There were legitimate concerns that Gordon wouldn't be worth his eligible max let alone the 50 mil we originally offered. Some people here even would've been happy with Dudley, Marshall and a first or even just Dudley and Marshall in a S/T. Demps doubled down on Eric and he didn't have to.

[HornetGuru]

Dathrone what if tyreke shoots 34% from 3 like two years ago, would u consider him better off ball? Gordon isnt in the teams long term future. Tyreke will be the two and someone else will be the three

[da ThRONe]

Dathrone what if tyreke shoots 34% from 3 like two years ago, would u consider him better off ball? Gordon isnt in the teams long term future. Tyreke will be the two and someone else will be the three

34% is pretty much an average shooter so if Evans can hit his 3's at that clip it would help the fit between Gordon and Jrue. Teams wouldn't just back off of Reke and dare him to shoot. Having all 3 guys with the ability to either play on or off ball would give the offense the chance to exploit the other teams weakest perimeter defender as all three guys can attack their defensive assignments off the dribble.

[RaisingTheBar]

Yes I did ask the poster if he realized Demps was the one that traded for Gordon and decided to keep him. The reason I did is because he mentioned Evans as "Gordon insurance" and Dell is the reason Eric is still here in the first place.

Let not act like Eric didn't have this history of injuries when we traded for him and didn't have it here before Dell matched the contract. We knew he was injury prone so the outcome is not a factor Demps wasn't aware of at the time. Therefore he has to accept the blame when a player still struggles with health issues. You can't just say well if he could have stayed healthy when that was the biggest reason you shouldn't have sign that guy to a max contract in the first place.

I've already said that personally I wouldn't have given him an extension so don't know why that keeps getting brought up.

When we traded for Gordon he was coming off a 56 game season. That was the most amount of games he's missed I'm a season before that. There is NO WAY, given his history before we traded him that you could have assumed he would miss almost 2 seasons worth of games. That is the hindsight.

If he played in 60 games each of the past 3 seasons that I would understand Demps taking the full blame for the trade if 60 games isn't acceptable. But there was NOTHING in his injury history to suggest he would have missed the amount if time he did. The trade was the right call.

[HornetGuru]

34% is pretty much an average shooter so if Evans can hit his 3's at that clip it would help the fit between Gordon and Jrue. Teams wouldn't just back off of Reke and dare him to shoot. Having all 3 guys with the ability to either play on or off ball would give the offense the chance to exploit the other teams weakest perimeter defender as all three guys can attack their defensive assignments off the dribble.

Agreed.

[da ThRONe]

I've already said that personally I wouldn't have given him an extension so don't know why that keeps getting brought up.

Not sure what in my comment made you think I haven't understood you agree with me about extending Gordon being a mistake.

When we traded for Gordon he was coming off a 56 game season. That was the most amount of games he's missed I'm a season before that. There is NO WAY, given his history before we traded him that you could have assumed he would miss almost 2 seasons worth of games. That is the hindsight.

Injury prone is injury prone. Could anyone predict it would be as bad as it was of course not, however this is exactly why you stay away from players with an extensive history of being injured. Not sure how that required hindsight.

If he played in 60 games each of the past 3 seasons that I would understand Demps taking the full blame for the trade if 60 games isn't acceptable. But there was NOTHING in his injury history to suggest he would have missed the amount if time he did. The trade was the right call.

It's funny you bring up the fact that I keep mentioning the extension even though you agree, but you keep bringing up the trade even though I've clearly agreed with you. I didn't have a problem with the trade and have said so. It's the extending an injury prone guy to the max that's my issue. Don't see how you missed that.

[BallSoHard]

I keep hearing this, but there's no intelligent reason behind it. You don't compound a mistake by throwing money at it and hoping all goes well. That is a low percentage decision. We could have traded him to avoid coming away with nothing. Demps waited for the market to set the price for Gordon in a year without a ton of big names free agents and it bite him. It's pretty much that simple.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "OK". I expect this team to be competitive next year. I would define that as "OK" so I agree with you. Will "OK" get us into the playoffs in a loaded Western conference if I had to bet I'd say no right now.

Compound what mistake? Trading CP3? Trading for Gordon? I legitimately don't know the mistake, but if it was what I asked; Demps had no choice but to take that trade since the other buyers (of CP3) were rebuffed by the league office.

At the time Gordon was considered one of the top young up and coming guards in the league. So which mistake is he compounding besides the one he pretty much had no choice of making? Regarding trading him, how do you know what was on the table and if there was anything that was a higher probability of success than keeping Gordon? What's happened with Gordon is almost the worse possible case of what we did and you simple can't run a team prognosticating players with worst case scenarios.

I recognize and applaud you saying it was a bad move at the time, and TBH it wasn't a home run contract at the time of the signing for anyone (however excited anyone wanted to be) but i completely understood why it was done with a new owner taking over. Without Gordon we were all but a rudderless **** in the NBA ocean. No way did anyone know he was going to miss that next season due to the injury.

[djpaul89]

Without Gordon we were all but a rudderless **** in the NBA ocean.

Sure you meant to say ship, but what you put is just as true...lol

[BallSoHard]

Sure you meant to say ship, but what you put is just as true...lol

Lol yeah; but it's better if I leave it unedited. To touch on it again; one intelligent reason to do it is no having a player of talent going into a season. Ticket sales and a product matter. Again this is all said without the knowledge that gordon pretty much loses the next season.

[da ThRONe]

Compound what mistake? Trading CP3? Trading for Gordon? I legitimately don't know the mistake, but if it was what I asked; Demps had no choice but to take that trade since the other buyers (of CP3) were rebuffed by the league office.

At the time Gordon was considered one of the top young up and coming guards in the league. So which mistake is he compounding besides the one he pretty much had no choice of making? Regarding trading him, how do you know what was on the table and if there was anything that was a higher probability of success than keeping Gordon? What's happened with Gordon is almost the worse possible case of what we did and you simple can't run a team prognosticating players with worst case scenarios.

I recognize and applaud you saying it was a bad move at the time, and TBH it wasn't a home run contract at the time of the signing for anyone (however excited anyone wanted to be) but i completely understood why it was done with a new owner taking over. Without Gordon we were all but a rudderless **** in the NBA ocean. No way did anyone know he was going to miss that next season due to the injury.

The mistake was not trading Gordon away the minute the two sides couldn't agree on a deal. He made it worse instead of letting him walk he matched a deal. Again there is no rule of any kind that forced Demps to match Pheonix max contract. The odds were against matching that deal and it's no surprise that Gordon's deal has up until now hurt this team.

Every year Gordon played less games then the following season the trend was there. He matched a deal after a season where Gordon only played in 9 games. Why would you give a max deal to a player that suffer in injury every year missing more and more games every year which finally lead to a 9 games after a weird season where a few games turn into the whole season. To me it just made no sense. Knowing when to cut your losses is important.

[BallSoHard]

The mistake was not trading Gordon away the minute the two sides couldn't agree on a deal. He made it worse instead of letting him walk he matched a deal. Again there is no rule of any kind that forced Demps to match Pheonix max contract. The odds were against matching that deal and it's no surprise that Gordon's deal has up until now hurt this team.

Every year Gordon played less games then the following season the trend was there. He matched a deal after a season where Gordon only played in 9 games. Why would you give a max deal to a player that suffer in injury every year missing more and more games every year which finally lead to a 9 games after a weird season where a few games turn into the whole season. To me it just made no sense. Knowing when to cut your losses is important.

Revisionist. If you can't see why what was done, was done then you're blind. You may not agree with it, but there was logic behind it.

[da ThRONe]

Revisionist. If you can't see why what was done, was done then you're blind. You may not agree with it, but there was logic behind it.

How can you say this when this was my whole reasoning for being against matching at the time(an opinion that had a lot of people angry with me). I still remember Good Citizen being one of the few people on my side about Gordon. He did it to save face. That is a terrible reason to make such a huge decision ever.

[BallSoHard]

How can you say this when this was my whole reasoning for being against matching at the time(an opinion that had a lot of people angry with me). I still remember Good Citizen being one of the few people on my side about Gordon. He did it to save face. That is a terrible reason to make such a huge decision ever.

I can say it like this: there was no logic that was full-proof, plainly it was a gamble. Your conclusion was based off of a trend for 2 years. His was based off of the hope that trend wouldn't continue. 2 people had different opinions. In reality you turned out to be right, but let's not act like if your job is on the line it's an easy choice. The worst case scenario outside of Gordon never playing again was what happened. Dell and to weigh gambling that or if he could get better and maybe eventually move him for talent. In reality, both of your strategies weren't much different which is the humorous part to me.


You said he should have traded him as soon as they couldn't agree and i'm pretty sure Dell's mindset was to trade him when he showed he was better and provided more value. The loin in which you suggested we trade him, his value (at that point) was an all time low. And to be frank it's probably roughly slightly lower now than it was. If teams were coming around that offseason offering some spectacular package, i'm willing to bet Dell pulls the trigger, but i'm sure there wasn't for a guy as you stated "was trending less and less games every year". So it was pretty much trade him for nothing, let him go for nothing, or gamble he'd get better and you'd either have a star or trade bait. Dell chose to gamble, and considering the state of the franchise, and the lack of dedicated salary we had at the time, it was really a very low risk gamble. Gordon may fall off the books this or next year and we still have a strong core with Ad just getting his max.

He gambled and lost; it's like watching the poker table and saying people should or shouldn't do anything when it's not your money on the table. Grats you got it right and i give you credit, but i understand why he did what he did; even if i didn't whole heartedly agree with it.At the time, i really felt dell was in between a rock and a hard place.

[da ThRONe]

I can say it like this: there was no logic that was full-proof, plainly it was a gamble. Your conclusion was based off of a trend for 2 years. His was based off of the hope that trend wouldn't continue. 2 people had different opinions. In reality you turned out to be right, but let's not act like if your job is on the line it's an easy choice. The worst case scenario outside of Gordon never playing again was what happened. Dell and to weigh gambling that or if he could get better and maybe eventually move him for talent. In reality, both of your strategies weren't much different which is the humorous part to me.


You said he should have traded him as soon as they couldn't agree and i'm pretty sure Dell's mindset was to trade him when he showed he was better and provided more value. The loin in which you suggested we trade him, his value (at that point) was an all time low. And to be frank it's probably roughly slightly lower now than it was. If teams were coming around that offseason offering some spectacular package, i'm willing to bet Dell pulls the trigger, but i'm sure there wasn't for a guy as you stated "was trending less and less games every year". So it was pretty much trade him for nothing, let him go for nothing, or gamble he'd get better and you'd either have a star or trade bait. Dell chose to gamble, and considering the state of the franchise, and the lack of dedicated salary we had at the time, it was really a very low risk gamble. Gordon may fall off the books this or next year and we still have a strong core with Ad just getting his max.

He gambled and lost; it's like watching the poker table and saying people should or shouldn't do anything when it's not your money on the table. Grats you got it right and i give you credit, but i understand why he did what he did; even if i didn't whole heartedly agree with it.At the time, i really felt dell was in between a rock and a hard place.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on a few things. I think there was a lot more things that could go wrong than there was that could go right matching that deal. Also don't know how Gordon's value was so low that we would have had to basically traded him for nothing yet at the same time he was able to secure a max deal the very same off season.

[Kibner]

It was a weird time. The Suns had lost Amare, IIRC, and wanted to bring in another potential star so they were willing to overpay, despite the legit injury concerns. The Hornets were in kind of the same boat with CP3 gone, and wanted to retain Gordon. They thought the injury concerns would scare off enough teams so that they could get him at somewhat of a discount.

That gamble didn't work and the team still wanted to have someone marketable in order to sell tickets. So they overpaid for Gordon. I was ok with the deal because I am normally an optimist for promising guys on my favorite team, but it ended up being the wrong move. Oh, well.

--

Dell is real good at turning trash into serviceable pieces. His decisions on highly paid players are still questionable to me.

[BallSoHard]

It was a weird time. The Suns had lost Amare, IIRC, and wanted to bring in another potential star so they were willing to overpay, despite the legit injury concerns. The Hornets were in kind of the same boat with CP3 gone, and wanted to retain Gordon. They thought the injury concerns would scare off enough teams so that they could get him at somewhat of a discount.

That gamble didn't work and the team still wanted to have someone marketable in order to sell tickets. So they overpaid for Gordon. I was ok with the deal because I am normally an optimist for promising guys on my favorite team, but it ended up being the wrong move. Oh, well.

--

Dell is real good at turning trash into serviceable pieces. His decisions on highly paid players are still questionable to me.

Exactly

[da ThRONe]

It was a weird time. The Suns had lost Amare, IIRC, and wanted to bring in another potential star so they were willing to overpay, despite the legit injury concerns. The Hornets were in kind of the same boat with CP3 gone, and wanted to retain Gordon. They thought the injury concerns would scare off enough teams so that they could get him at somewhat of a discount.

That gamble didn't work and the team still wanted to have someone marketable in order to sell tickets. So they overpaid for Gordon. I was ok with the deal because I am normally an optimist for promising guys on my favorite team, but it ended up being the wrong move. Oh, well.

--

Dell is real good at turning trash into serviceable pieces. His decisions on highly paid players are still questionable to me.

This sums up my feelings on Demps as a GM. I've been trying to be more reserved about my criticism considering he has been in some tough situations.

[fullcourtpress]

I think Dell realizes that CAP SPACE is not something we can compete with equally with our competitors; while realizing that nothing could be worse than being saddled with the wrong choice when AD's time to sign comes ala CP3

Tyreke
Jrue
Gordon
Davis
Asik

Jrue
Gordon
Salmons
Davis
Asik

Tyreke
Fredette
Babbit
Ryno
Davis

Tyreke
Fredette
Babbit
Ryno
Ajincia

Jrue
Gordon
Salmons
Ryno
Ajincia

[odine]

Iam trying to be optimistic here. If you ever watched james Harden's defense, it can be said that two years ago Asik carried Rockets defensively to the playoff. Unless some pelicans players decide to pull off James Hardenesque defense, Pelicans' defense is good enough for playoff.
Things that can ruin pel's chance
1. AD's is not good engouh jump shooter when heavily guarded.
2.Monty throws the towel early on Asik-AD duo because: AD takes longer time to change his defensive mindset from C to PF, AD-Rino too good offensively
3.Lingering effect of last year injuries
4.Sf position turns out to be too much of achiles hill

I have a question, was Asik the reason pells don't have the cash to resign Anthony Morrow and Alfarouq Aminu?

[UptownFuz504]

Dathrone what if tyreke shoots 34% from 3 like two years ago, would u consider him better off ball? Gordon isnt in the teams long term future. Tyreke will be the two and someone else will be the three

Is there a source to back up the claim that Gordon isn't in the long term plans or is this fan generated?

[RaisingTheBar]

Not sure what in my comment made you think I haven't understood you agree with me about extending Gordon being a mistake.

"You can't just say well if he could have stayed healthy when that was the biggest reason you shouldn't have sign that guy to a max contract in the first place." << That comment

Injury prone is injury prone. Could anyone predict it would be as bad as it was of course not, however this is exactly why you stay away from players with an extensive history of being injured. Not sure how that required hindsight.

I think the disconnect is that you see a player who misses 20 games and a guy who missed 75 games equal, therefore no matter how many games Gordon missed, if he missed any you would have blamed Demps. You are saying there haven't been players who have missed a season or 2 of 20 games and haven't went on to have pretty healthy careers?

It's funny you bring up the fact that I keep mentioning the extension even though you agree, but you keep bringing up the trade even though I've clearly agreed with you. I didn't have a problem with the trade and have said so. It's the extending an injury prone guy to the max that's my issue. Don't see how you missed that.

The 60 game comment had nothing to do with my last sentence. I just threw that in to reiterate my point. Could/should have left that out but it still remains the same point. Injury prone ISN'T just injury prone. A guy who recently misses 15-20 games yearly like Pau Gasol is not missing complete seasons worth of games like Rose has.

[Julio]

PHX offered him the max. Clearly there was some value for Gordon. Also even if there was no trade to be had you let Gordon situation become the Suns problem. It seems very simple to me.

ASSETS is the keyword, that means expiring deals, draft picks, or young prospects. Throwing a big contract at someone who is a restricted free agent is not giving up anything. Phx had ALOTof cap space that year dude. I understand Dell's situation and to see the peices he pulled off while working around that horrible Gordon contract is just amazing.