The suns have made it clear he is not part of the future. They have a #2 in Green.
Even if we play him he is a negative on the court as well. And we can’t commit time to him since he’s always injured.
Bradley Beal Departure Thread
- Thread starter Hoop Head
- Start date
The suns have made it clear he is not part of the future. They have a #2 in Green.
Even if we play him he is a negative on the court as well. And we can’t commit time to him since he’s always injured.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 133,600
- Reaction score
- 73,896
@Hoop Head
If Bradley Beal gets bought out, may we should retitle the thread as the Bradley Beal Depreciation Thread.
If Bradley Beal gets bought out, may we should retitle the thread as the Bradley Beal Depreciation Thread.
OP
OP
@Hoop Head
If Bradley Beal gets bought out, may we should retitle the thread as the Bradley Beal Depreciation Thread.
He's been depreciating since he's been here, sadly. If he's stretched maybe we can change it to "Bradley Beal Precipitates on the Cap Sheet". Keep everyone on their toes.
Phrazbit
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Posts
- 22,460
- Reaction score
- 15,125
I don't think Green is going to factor into our plans much long term. If they can move him at some point, I expect they will.
He's overpaid and I think he's going to be an awful fit with Booker.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 133,600
- Reaction score
- 73,896
As I understand it, the Suns could buy out Beal without stretching and waiving him.
However, this would likely leave them over the second tax apron for two years. The penalties get stiffer with time, such as pushing back future first round picks to the end of the first round.
It would also cause sizable tax penalties, limit to vet minimum signings, inability to aggregate players in trade and without exceptions to sign players who have more value.
Yes, it could resemble the situation with the buyout of Damian Lillard.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 133,600
- Reaction score
- 73,896
Gambo points out some advantages to buying out and stretching Bradley Beal's contract.
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Last edited:
Yeah I guess I don’t fully understand this either. If they have to pay his contract only for him to not play, how does this benefit the Suns? From a competitive standpoint why even do this? He could in theory sign with a rival for dirt cheap and actually contribute if healthy…Why do this?
JCSunsfan
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2002
- Posts
- 22,834
- Reaction score
- 7,496
Because they are developing new talent for the future. They are not trying to be competitive now. Beal is just in the way. Why is this so hard to understand?
GatorAZ
feed hopkins
.
At the end of the day even Ishbia isn’t blowing crazy repeater tax dollars on a non-contender.
OP
OP
Great, unlocking a future pick to trade for more garbage. This is like extending the disaster of the KD deal beyond his time here.
Yuma
Suns are my Kryptonite!
As Gambo points out, NOW is the time to stretch and waive guys since the cap is rising the next few years. The hit by Beal is not so much. This is MUCH better than trading him and having to give up the few assets we have to accomplish it.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 133,600
- Reaction score
- 73,896
Since the Suns presently can't aggregate players in trades and have few available draft assets, they don't have much to entice a team to trade for Beal.
They could ride Beal's contract out for the next two seasons, but apparently have chosen otherwise.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 133,600
- Reaction score
- 73,896
Yes, after the Suns traded Nurkic, they quit spending.
ish's hands are still tied - will be so until the beal situation has a "resolution"
i think ish still may have a big move in mind but has to get under the apron(s) to make it happen - that's why he won't wait and just ride out beal's contract for 2 years which isn't really that long at all but anyway
i think ish still may have a big move in mind but has to get under the apron(s) to make it happen - that's why he won't wait and just ride out beal's contract for 2 years which isn't really that long at all but anyway
GatorAZ
feed hopkins
Clippers now make sense since they traded Powell.
SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
I still think it's stupid to turn a two-year problem into a five-year problem, but to be fair, as cap keeps rising, Beal's stretch provision dead cap is not going to look as bad. I still think they should just ride it out. If you have to cut salary to get under the second apron, use Richards, O'Neale, and Allen to do so.
Book will be adding to that next year despite the increase, he'll be on the Books for 70M which is an increase of 17M.
SirStefan32
Krycek, Alex Krycek
Well, I am not concerned about the next two years- the Suns would be stuck with Beal's contract anyway for two years. I am more concerned with years three, four, and five.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 133,600
- Reaction score
- 73,896
Something to think about. The current CBA expires after the 2029-30 season.
It also includes a mutual opt-out option after the 2028-29 season.
It also includes a mutual opt-out option after the 2028-29 season.
Folster
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Posts
- 17,868
- Reaction score
- 8,906
Beal and Harden in the same backcourt? Bleh! Rumors of the Lakers interest is also a puzzling fit for Beal next to Luka and Reaves. Miami no longer has a need for Beal with Hero and Powell now. Milwaukee seems like the best fit for Beal.
CardsSunsDbacks
Not So Skeptical
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2012
- Posts
- 10,328
- Reaction score
- 6,861
It's a big problem for 2 years or minor nuisance for 5 years. It also saves the team over $200m in tax money as well. Stretching is probably the only real option at this point.
The only thing I will appreciate is him getting jettisoned from this team. His production was a joke for that contract. One of the worst trades in team history from that standpoint. In addition, getting rid of Beal gives us flexibility. We can aggregate player salaries again in trades. That opens up more move possibilities for the Suns.
